#because in the end so does piracy

[literaturezombie]

Izzy ofmd s2 finale is so black sails Charles Vane coded and when u think about it that way it makes the death choice make so much sense

[yasmini24]

idk why I decided to rewatch the lodge when I hate love triangles

[avelera]

Man, there’s all these little beats in OFMD S2 1-3 where people keep EXPECTING Stede to be upset or horrified about Ed’s actions and then he’s just. Not. In a way that reminded me of how a lot of fanon kept softening Stede into someone who doesn’t swear and is horrified at Ed for setting those ships on fire when imo to my eyes he was horrified for Ed because Ed was still so clearly distressed about it.

- Zheng Yi Sao asks Stede how he’s doing now that he knows Ed did horrible things to his crew and there’s this beat and Stede just pivots to, oh yeah, sometimes Ed is troubled. Like it didn’t occur to him to be upset on the crew’s behalf he’s worried about Ed.

- Izzy keeps trying to spare Stede’s feelings and cover up Ed’s spiral, but Stede clocked what was going on with Ed immediately and wasn’t the least bit intimidated or bothered. The knives brought the room together. Of course Ed’s trying to burn the world down or die trying. Duh. And I genuinely don’t think the STUFF in the Revenge mattered even a fraction to Stede as much as the signs of Ed’s breakdown broke his heart. It’s just STUFF, who cares.

- Lucius had to SPECIFICALLY call out Stede for not being surprised or bothered by what happened to him. What Ed did. Stede has to almost consciously remind himself to express polite concern. He just doesn’t actually care, instinctively or automatically, about what happened to Lucius. Part of it is he blames himself more than Ed. Part of it is he just doesn’t care, Ed is the priority.

They’re little blink and you’ll miss it pauses in some cases. Micro-expressions. The absence of a reaction. But honestly, I will scream it to the end of time, Stede is not some nonviolent creampuff scared or upset by Ed’s evil ways. He wants to join Ed in the atrocities. The man ran away to become a pirate. He asked if Lucius was taking notes during a murderous raid.

Stede’s at least a little on some kind of whackadoodle pirate comedy neurodivergence spectrum to the point where he actually really actually struggles to empathize with people, even people he cares about!, if their feelings conflict with his hyperfixation (piracy) and the love of his life (Ed Teach). He’s always, ALWAYS going to pick Ed over Lucius or Izzy or his crew or even his own feelings, if the option is there. He will literally throw himself overboard to get to Ed’s side. No pause. No consideration of anyone else or even his own safety.

Stede sometimes seems to have to consciously remind himself things like, oh yeah, the crew, I need to see to them. Not because he’s heartless or doesn’t care, but because it takes a bit of conscious effort for him to see beyond the laser-focused spotlight of what and who he does care most about, he has to remind himself of social niceties and other people’s feelings (just see him running away in the first place!) when he gets an idea in his head. It’s as if he had to train himself to consciously care about some things other people care about and as a neurodivergent person myself, that felt very familiar in a comedically writ large sort of way. I’d even argue that’s where all his aristocratic social niceties come from. They were his guidebook for how to do things “right” in a world that otherwise made no sense to him outside his hyperfixations. He practiced being a person through the aristocratic training because it was all so foreign to him from the start, including caring, actually caring, about the needs of others. Not because he’s consciously evil or consciously a jerk. The instinct just isn’t there unless he practices at it until it becomes reflex to ask how others are doing, because on his own his brain just doesn’t really notice or care.

I just… hope the fandom notes and has as much FUN as I do noticing all the little moments where even people inside the story of OFMD expect Stede to act in a normal way and instead he remains unhinged, laser-focused on Ed.

Stede’s not just an Ed apologist, he truly doesn’t blame Ed for any of it. He blames only himself. He doesn’t always voice this but he really really only cares about anyone else including the crew as a DISTANT second and he has to consciously REMIND himself to do so. He is able to rally to take action, to care about their physical needs like safety during the rescue, but he still struggles, deeply struggles, to remember to show empathy in a non-performative way for anyone except his special person, Ed.

Stede’s not a creampuff, not a nice guy, not some emotionally or morally perfect angel. He has to consciously practice caring about literally anything else but what he wants to do and his special person. And to me that’s a thousand times more interesting than shoving him in a box labeled “the blond, pacifist do-gooder good guy” in their relationship.

[alexanderwales]

Superheroes make a lot more sense in a world where there's a lot of crime. Not only is there more opportunity for heroism, I think having a work of fiction set during a transitional period is often the best way to go, because then any question about how this is at all sustainable can be answered with a curt "it's not".

One of my favorite reasons for a period of criminality is when there's a big war with a lot of soldiers trained in the arts of violence and warfare, fed and clothed by the state, who then go back to economic inequality once the war is done, having learned everything there is to know about doing violence against other people. This is the explanation that I've always heard for the Golden Age of Piracy, which started in 1713 when the War of Spanish Succession ended and a whole bunch of sailors suddenly had nothing to do with their lives and all the skills necessary to rob ships.

So I've been doing some superhero worldbuilding, trying to get the worst possible crime wave in a world that's at least somewhat like our own, set a few years after the end of a major war in a country that decided not to transition it's soldiers back home, with drug problems, prohibition problems, rampant inequality, and as many other triggers as I can think of.

But I think there's a risk, if you do all that setup, to overshadowing the superheroes. If there's rampant corruption and a major war and income inequality, does it really make that much sense to focus on the fights rather than the root causes?

And I think this is an area where a rough understanding of criminality really hampers me, because I want a reconstruction of superhero stories, and not to dwell too much on why people commit the crimes they do. I do think having a lot of the bank robbers and bandits be ex-military helps in a way though, as it implicates the failures of their government more than having these just be fundamentally bad people that a fundamentally good person needs to stop.

Plus the wake of a major war is a great way to bring in a lot of the superhero kitchen sink, particularly with of technological efforts that were a part of the war.

[neil-gaiman]

Hi Neil,

I hope this doesn't get buried in the ask box, but if it does, I'll still be glad I sent this, just to know this little lengthy slice of complement and thanks existed in your inbox is enough. I apologize for the length, I am pretty sure the grammar is in tatters...and probably just the general awkwardness in advance.

Frist of all, congratulations for Good Omens Season2, it's a roaring success even here in this...I don't know, bottomless pit? I myself and some others fondly call it the PRC. The show didn't made pass the firewall officially, neither was Prime Video. People still managed to watch it eventually by VPNs, shared accounts and when times are desperate...sorry, piracy. Chinese fans, including myself, using every tool in the shed to try to fool Amazon™ and our goverment, just to watch this on Prime and try to help to manifest S3, is one hell of an experience. This kind of experience is pathetic, ridiculous....and somehow hilarious in a dark, gallows humor way, almost like some bad spy comedy, I just have to share it. Worth all the trouble by the way, the reward at the end of the back channel is...well, some divine comedy to say the very least. All in all, it's a brilliant show and a solid job well-done.

Then some of my personal gratitude. They say good art resonates with your soul, I now know this is just as true as matter and gravity. Since I know Good Omens certainly resonated with mine. I'll redact the typical "depression and anxiety reduced me to a husk, a shadow of my former self" story and get to the result for brevity's sake. I can't write anything meaningful while I know I took joy in writing, I can't finish reading anything longer than a brochure while I know I was such a bookworm in the past. Then I was compelled to get up in the middle of the night, wrote a full 5000 character long analysis after marathoned S2, and then write even more analyses in both Chinese and English. I picked up American Gods because I know I need more Neil Gaiman in my life and then impressed by myself for actually finishes it the second time 5 years later. I didn't know how exactly that happened through one watch of a TV show, but I know I am changed for the better. I grasped life again, and can start living again, somehow. The resonation just keeps on giving.

This is a quiet, gentle and romantic story, it is soothing, accepting, filled to the brim with love and kindness, and it makes me feel safe and accepted and loved in a way I never felt before. I thank you for it, and hope thart I may have the privlige to witness more of this miracle. Thank you Neil, Sir Terry Pratchett and the team for this miraculous book and this miraculous show.

谢谢。(I just had to say thanks with my mother tongue, it feels more earnest this way)

Thank you so much! I'm impressed by everything you and your countryfolk have gone through to watch it as legitimately as you could.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

An adversarial iMessage client for Android

Adversarial interoperability is one of the most reliable ways to protect tech users from predatory corporations: that's when a technologist reverse-engineers an existing product to reconfigure or mod it (interoperability) in ways its users like, but which its manufacturer objects to (adversarial):

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interoperability

"Adversarial interop" is a mouthful, so at EFF, we coined the term "competitive compatibility," or comcom, which is a lot easier to say and to spell.

Scratch any tech success and you'll find a comcom story. After all, when a company turns its screws on its users, it's good business to offer an aftermarket mod that loosens them again. HP's $10,000/gallon inkjet ink is like a bat-signal for third-party ink companies. When Mercedes announces that it's going to sell you access to your car's accelerator pedal as a subscription service, that's like an engraved invitation to clever independent mechanics who'll charge you a single fee to permanently unlock that "feature":

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/12/05/carmakers-push-forward-with-plans-to-make-basic-features-subscription-services-despite-widespread-backlash/

Comcom saved giant tech companies like Apple. Microsoft tried to kill the Mac by rolling out a truly cursèd version of MS Office for MacOS. Mac users (5% of the market) who tried to send Word, Excel or Powerpoint files to Windows users (95% of the market) were stymied: their files wouldn't open, or they'd go corrupt. Tech managers like me started throwing the graphic designer's Mac and replacing it with a Windows box with a big graphics card and Windows versions of Adobe's tools.

Comcom saved Apple's bacon. Apple reverse-engineered MS's flagship software suite and made a comcom version, iWork, whose Pages, Numbers and Keynote could flawlessly read and write MS's Word, Excel and Powerpoint files:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/adversarial-interoperability-reviving-elegant-weapon-more-civilized-age-slay

It's tempting to think of iWork as benefiting Apple users, and certainly the people who installed and used it benefited from it. But Windows users also benefited from iWork. The existence of iWork meant that Windows users could seamlessly collaborate on and share files with their Mac colleagues. IWork didn't just add a new feature to the Mac ("read and write files that originated with Windows users") – it also added a feature to Windows: "collaborate with Mac users."

Every pirate wants to be an admiral. Though comcom rescued Apple from a monopolist's sneaky attempt to drive it out of business, Apple – now a three trillion dollar company – has repeatedly attacked comcom when it was applied to Apple's products. When Apple did comcom, that was progress. When someone does comcom to Apple, that's piracy.

Apple has many tools at its disposal that Microsoft lacked in the early 2000s. Radical new interpretations of existing copyright, contract, patent and trademark law allows Apple – and other tech giants – to threaten rivals who engage in comcom with both criminal and civil penalties. That's right, you can go to prison for comcom these days. No wonder Jay Freeman calls this "felony contempt of business model":

https://pluralistic.net/2023/11/09/lead-me-not-into-temptation/#chamberlain

Take iMessage, Apple's end-to-end encrypted (E2EE) instant messaging tool. Apple customers can use iMessage to send each other private messages that can't be read or altered by third parties – not cops, not crooks, not even Apple. That's important, because when private messaging systems get hacked, bad things happen:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_celebrity_nude_photo_leak

But Apple has steadfastly refused to offer an iMessage app for non-Apple systems. If you're an Apple customer holding a sensitive discussion with an Android user, Apple refuses to offer you a tool to maintain your privacy. Those messages are sent "in the clear," over the 38-year-old SMS protocol, which is trivial to spy on and disrupt.

Apple sacrifices its users' security and integrity in the hopes that they will put pressure on their friends to move into Apple's walled garden. As CEO Tim Cook told a reporter: if you want to have secure communications with your mother, buy her an iPhone:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tim-cook-says-buy-mom-210347694.html

Last September, a 16-year old high school student calling himself JJTech published a technical teardown of iMessage, showing how any device could send and receive encrypted messages with iMessage users, even without an Apple ID:

https://jjtech.dev/reverse-engineering/imessage-explained/

JJTech even published code to do this, in an open source library called Pypush:

https://github.com/JJTech0130/pypush

In the weeks since, Beeper has been working to productize JJTech's code, and this week, they announced Beeper Mini, an Android-based iMessage client that is end-to-end encrypted:

https://beeper.notion.site/How-Beeper-Mini-Works-966cb11019f8444f90baa314d2f43a54

Beeper is known for a multiprotocol chat client built on Matrix, allowing you to manage several kinds of chat from a single app. These multiprotocol chats have been around forever. Indeed, iMessage started out as one – when it was called "iChat," it supported Google Talk and Jabber, another multiprotocol tool. Other tools like Pidgin have kept the flame alive for decades, and have millions of devoted users:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/07/tower-babel-how-public-interest-internet-trying-save-messaging-and-banish-big

But iMessage support has remained elusive. Last month, Nothing launched Sunchoice, a disastrous attempt to bring iMessage to Android, which used Macs in a data-center to intercept and forward messages to Android users, breaking E2EE and introducing massive surveillance risks:

https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/21/23970740/sunbird-imessage-app-shut-down-privacy-nothing-chats-phone-2

Beeper Mini does not have these defects. The system encrypts and decrypts messages on the Android device itself, and directly communicates with Apple's servers. It gathers some telemetry for debugging, and this can be turned off in preferences. It sends a single SMS to Apple's servers during setup, which changes your device's bubble from green to blue, so that Apple users now correctly see your device as a secure endpoint for iMessage communications.

Beeper Mini is now available in Google Play:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.beeper.ima&hl=en_US

Now, this is a high-stakes business. Apple has a long history of threatening companies like Beeper over conduct like this. And Google has a long history deferring to those threats – as it did with OG App, a superior third-party Instagram app that it summarily yanked after Meta complained:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/05/battery-vampire/#drained

But while iMessage for Android is good for Android users, it's also very good for Apple customers, who can now get the privacy and security guarantees of iMessage for all their contacts, not just the ones who bought the same kind of phone as they did. The stakes for communications breaches have never been higher, and antitrust scrutiny on Big Tech companies has never been so intense.

Apple recently announced that it would add RCS support to iOS devices (RCS is a secure successor to SMS):

https://9to5mac.com/2023/11/16/apple-rcs-coming-to-iphone/

Early word from developers suggests that this support will have all kinds of boobytraps. That's par for the course with Apple, who love to announce splashy reversals of their worst policies – like their opposition to right to repair – while finding sneaky ways to go on abusing its customers:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/22/vin-locking/#thought-differently

The ball is in Apple's court, and, to a lesser extent, in Google's. As part of the mobile duopoly, Google has joined with Apple in facilitating the removal of comcom tools from its app store. But Google has also spent millions on an ad campaign shaming Apple for exposing its users to privacy risks when talking to Android users:

https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/21/23883609/google-rcs-message-apple-iphone-ipager-ad

While we all wait for the other shoe to drop, Android users can get set up on Beeper Mini, and technologists can kick the tires on its code libraries and privacy guarantees.

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/2023/12/07/blue-bubbles-for-all/#never-underestimate-the-determination-of-a-kid-who-is-time-rich-and-cash-poor

[shittinggold]

Thinking about how Max and Jack are like. Opposite ends of the same spectrum when it comes to narrativisation. On the one hand you have Jack who's obsessed with his legacy, obsessed with his story, with his name. Mr. "great art has felled Empires", Mr. " put that down and read a book". The man who sees victory in the form of who gets to write whose story. He does everything so that he can shape the future of Nassau in a way that recognises him and his name, and yet, he can't see it! He can't actually see the story he's in. He doesn't know his name is remembered, as both a real person and someone whose story has been retold countless times. He never got to the end of Woodes Rogers' book. He looks at the Jolly Roger, the flag that will symbolise piracy in two hundred years' time and he says "it's fine". He doesn't even know his own name! He is driven by the impact that the downfall of the calico industry had on his father and he doesn't even know that his name is Calico Jack. He is obsessed with writing the future and so is blind to how that future will actually remember him. He doesn't know the joke is on him.

And then you have Max who is powerfully invested in being as unremembered as possible. Ms. "power is most effective when it is least perceived". Ms. "this is all built upon sand". She is neof the few main characters who is neither a Treasure Island character nor a historical figure, and the only main character who doesn't have a last name. She uses that namelessness as a defence against being cast aside by the narrative, because she sees it! She sees the walls of the narrative, and knows that any story written about her will not be kind to her. "They will call me The Whore Who Lost Everything". Because of her gender, her race, her profession, her sexuality. She hides between the cracks of the narrative because she knows on some instinctive level that if she plays by the narrative's rules then she will always end up outside of the story, looking in on it. So she is able to shape the future of Nassau more than anyone else. She doesn't try to tell her story, but we still see it. "In another time, another place, they would have called me a Queen". She is talking to us. We are in that other time and place. She is pointing out the glass walls of the story and through them pointing directly at us as we watch her win.

It's like. In this show, the better a storyteller you are the more power you have to shape reality to your image. The more obsessed you are with telling the story the higher chance that the story will catch you in its grip and dash you helplessly against the rocks. Good luck.

[piratecaptainscaptainpirates]

The ending of Impossible Birds is an absolute masterpiece, and I think it's in part because it could've scanned so differently.

Ed is having the worst time ever. He's being actively self-destructive and he's sliding hard into the kind of piracy he said last season he hated. Fang, the crew member who's been with him the longest and knows him best, is upset because he showed so little emotion when Ivan died. He freaked everyone out by waving a gun around and pointing it under his own chin. He finally reached a breaking point with Izzy and shot him. He's overworking the crew and seems focused on just going on raid after raid without end.

And in another show, one less character-driven, Ed's impossible birds bit at the end could've been very different. It could have been an almost triumphant thing, a vindicated sort of rejection of the kind of life Ed thinks he'll never get to have. Ed wouldn't have been happy, but he could've thrown himself into being this sort of pirate with a sort of villianous satisfaction. This sort of presentation of the scene wouldn't even require the writing to be changed at all, it's all down to the acting and music choices. "We'll rob and sail and raise hell forever and ever, without end" - that's the sort of thing we've all heard in dozens of pirate movies before!

But Ed is miserable. He does not want to be doing this. He's visibly holding back tears and struggling to breathe as he tries not to cry. It sounds like he's announcing his own death sentence. And over it all, they play a song that repeats over and over "my heart is full of love, I have nothing else." Ed is in love and he's hurting and he can't see any way forward, and it's so raw and visceral it makes me tear up every time.

This show, guys. Damn. They know what they're doing.

[subway-tolkien]

Okay, this is 1600 words of (positive!) meta regarding the OFMD finale. Included is character analysis and a treatise on why a certain trope people keep throwing around does not apply here.

This is of course just my take, and I'm sure people will disagree, but I needed to get this out. Apologies if it comes off disjointed, I've had like no sleep.

Spoilers within, obviously. You have been warned. Heed the tags. I didn't tag any characters because I consider it a spoiler, but you know who this is about.

Listen. Listen.

Let me start off by saying I have been where you are. I’ve had beloved characters die, either because it was important to the narrative or for shock value. I’ve been there, so I’m not coming at this without empathy. I’m not an Izzy hater. I loved him as a character. I’m truly sad to see him go.

But from what I’m seeing around Twitter and tumblr, some of you do not understand the role of an antagonist in a story.

Izzy was always meant to die. The moment he said, in the first season, “the only retirement we get is death,” I knew he was meant to die in the end. The foreshadowing ran through both seasons. Izzy was the true antagonist of S1. He was there to keep Blackbeard tethered when he started pulling away, and yet he also set the plot in motion. He inadvertently introduced Blackbeard to the person who let him be just Ed. He put Ed on his own path to redemption without even knowing it.

S1 ended with Izzy getting what he wanted as Ed lost everything he had. S2 was about Izzy coming to terms with the fact that he’d gone too far, he’d turned Ed into a monster. It wasn’t what he wanted. He wanted Blackbeard back, just like old times. Instead, he got the Kraken, and it was more than he bargained for.

Especially after it cost him his leg and he realized how far gone Ed really was. The conversation that ended with Izzy’s half-assed suicide attempt was the final blow to Izzy—Ed really didn’t seem to care anymore. Where Izzy wanted him to stop giving a shit about his silly boyfriend, he instead got a Blackbeard who didn’t care about anything, and he was apparently now included in that category.

(I said half-assed suicide attempt because Izzy wasn’t meant to die then, THAT would have been an empty, pointless death. It wouldn’t have taught Ed anything—in fact, all it did was make him more self-destructive, which was Izzy’s purpose to the narrative, but not his endgame. That Ed thought Izzy killed himself pushed Ed to the brink. Ed wanted to die and take every scrap of Blackbeard with him. Had Izzy successfully killed himself, Ed and the Revenge would be at the bottom of the ocean.

It wasn’t until the crew left Izzy the unicorn leg that he realized the power of compassion, the incredible act of grace from a crew that suffered so much from Izzy’s own machinations and didn't need to forgive him. It moved him to tears, and it moved him to accept that maybe it wasn’t such a bad idea to let people in, to let himself be cared for. It was a foreign concept and something Izzy likely hadn’t experienced since losing his family (I fully expect a shit ton of fanfic of Izzy’s life before piracy).

Israel Hands found the capacity to let love all the way in and by god, did he pursue it.

But, again, Izzy was always meant to die, and I’m glad they stuck to the narrative they set out with instead of placating fandom and letting our influence dictate how they told this story That’s never good, trust me. Fandom should not influence a creator’s decisions regarding their own characters. It rarely if ever ends well.

[Stares in Voltron S8]

And I see a lot of people out here throwing the “bury your gays” phrase around—I beg you, please look up the definition of the trope. Izzy didn’t die because he was queer, he didn’t die because of his disability. He wasn’t one half of the only queer couple in the show fridged for shock value. He wasn’t killed off due to pressure from conservative viewers. He wasn’t the only queer, disabled character.

They didn’t kill off Lucius, or Jackie, or Wee John. Would you be as outraged if it was any of them?

Killing Eve is bury your gays. Supernatural is bury your gays. Pretty much any film, book, TV show, whatever, where a queer character dies because they’re queer, of AIDs, to further the narrative for a straight person, etc—that is burying your gays.

Izzy’s death was none of those things. Izzy’s death had meaning.

Izzy’s death freed Ed from the Blackbeard persona. It finally forced Izzy to say the things he couldn’t say until he realized it was his last chance. Izzy was also tired. I honestly think he stuck it out for Ed’s sake, because he was afraid to let Blackbeard go without making sure Ed would be ok.

He loved the idea of Blackbeard, but over time, he learned to love Ed. He finally understood what Ed tried to tell him the whole time.

“Fuck off, you twat. You’re surrounded by family.”

You’re safe. You’re loved. You don’t need me anymore. You don’t need to be reminded of who you’re capable of being, you need the people who will guide you to who you will become, and I’m not one of them.

I know a lot of Izzy fans are stung by his death, some of you are deeply upset. I get that. Like I said, I’ve been there. Sirius’s death made me throw that fucking book across the room. That Fucking Woman™ killed off my entire OTP, purely for shock value and, imho, a direct response to shippers. Trust me, I have felt betrayed by a creator for their decisions.

But I need you to understand that no, this was not a personal attack, this was not malicious, this was not “bury your gays." A show that celebrates queerness and diversity is not suddenly homophobic and ableist because your favorite character died and happened to be both of those things. But when the majority of your cast of characters is different in some way, and they’re in a show about 18th century pirates, you have to accept that one of them could, in fact, die. “Anyone Can Die” is also a trope and the more accurate one to describe E8.

If only being queer and disabled made you invincible.

Spoiler alert: it doesn’t.

And no, I’m not an Izzy hater. I loved him, I loved him as an antagonist, and I loved his redemption arc. He was fascinating and Con put his whole O’Nussy into that part. I’m sorry to see him go, but as a mystery writer who often has to kill off beloved characters, I understand that he served the purpose he had from the beginning.

I swear, if some of you had your way, there’d be no conflict at all in any form of media. This what a steady diet of nothing but fanfic gets you. This is not a fluffy one-shot with magical healing dick and a happy ending where everyone sails off into the sunset. If that’s what you wanted, what you headcanoned, you did this to yourself. It’s not David et al’s fault that we took that character and babygirled him. That’s the risk we take when we decide to love a specific character, when we take a genuinely terrible person (in S1) and woobify him.

So, please stop harassing and attacking David, Alex, et al. David did not and should not change his story to placate us. The fact he went ahead with it despite the backlash I’m sure he expected makes me respect him as a creator even more.

Anyway, I’m going to revel that we have three (!) queer relationships with happy endings where one or both didn’t immediately die (again, the actual definition of “bury your gays”) and that we got at least two seasons of a little show that celebrated individualism, diversity, queerness, compassion, and love.

In the end, it all came down to love.

“There he is.”

Goodbye, Blackbeard.

Hello, Ed.

[cough-droplet]

People have been discussing what Shirakura said in the "Toei's Secret-Spilling Special!" that came out yesterday on TTFC but I've seen a lot of confusion based on partial translations so I recruited my usual co-conspirators michaelele and Flame to translate the full thing. The text of the interview follows. The video will probably be up on my wordpress at some point today.

Please introduce yourself.

Shirakura: My name is [Shin'ichiro] Shirakura. I'm a poor old man who TTFC has abducted and forced to talk to you all. Glad to be here.

We have a load of questions for you. Are you prepared?

Shirakura: I heard we received hundreds of questions, which I'm really grateful for, because that means Toei's secrets are as dark and alluring as the ocean depths. Keeping their secrets is usually my trade, but today I get to do the opposite. I'm a bit nervous and hope this doesn't upset anyone.

What does the Character Strategy Department do?

Shirakura: Character-based IP have been at the center of Toei's business for over 50 years at this point, so it seemed like high time to make it more official. The Character Strategy Department creates business strategies for our various character-based IP, or plans for them at least.

Looking back to 2024, what do you think of the hype surrounding Royal Sentai King-Ohger's final act?

Shirakura: I'm truly grateful to all the King-Ohger fans, because it wouldn't be possible without them. TTFC was already working with Producer [Takahito] Omori on cutting together the final three episodes into a special edition for release on TTFC. So the plan was always there, and, in fact, I considered giving that cut a straight-up theatrical release. It did get a limited theatrical showing in the end, albeit as a one-day-only deal for members. We would like to do something similar again at some point, but it's really all because of our fans.

What are your thoughts on its successor, Cranked-Up Sentai Boonboomger?

Shirakura: When I first heard the title, "Cranked-Up Sentai Boonboomger," I thought it was weird, but... it kind of rolls off the tongue nicely. Despite its strangeness, it has a certain aura. Then, upon closer inspection, I knew only Producer [Yoshito] Kuji could have come up with it.

Whenever you'd ask Kuji to describe what the show's about, he'll be like... [stone-faced] "It's a cranked-up show." He'd say it just like that, cold as ice. He's really passionate, but he keeps it under the surface, so on the surface he's this mild-mannered, gentle kind of guy. So then I heard the red ranger go, "THAT'S CRANKED UP!" and I shouted "That's where that came from!"

I don't know if "secure" is quite the right word, but I think it's a show that's made with a lot of care.

So the production schedules have seen a shift?

Shirakura: Boonboomger is still following King-Ohger's production cycle, but the series after it will have a two-month head start. The idea of that is… Well, earlier I joked about the Character Strategy Department, but the point isn't just to expand our business dealings with regards to character-based IP such as the Super Sentai and Kamen Rider franchises, but to actively improve the shows in every way possible. Looking at it from the business end of things, Kamen Rider Gavv is actually the first show made in this adjusted production cycle.

The first reason for this is to reduce overseas piracy. The problem with our shows being pirated… The people who pirate our programs are huge fans who love the shows, there's no doubt about that, but in a way, they're also fanatics. What I mean by that is... When these people form their opinions on the shows before the official release has a chance to come out, they're in a position to color the opinions of the fans who watch the official releases. So, for instance, when the official release comes out, the streaming platforms will be flooded with comments like, "If the toys were like so-and-so instead I would buy them," "If they did this then the show would be good."

The head start from pirating lets fanatics drown out all other conversation about a show, even though fanatics judge things differently. So one of our goals was to reduce that.

Another reason was just to revamp our working environment. For years, it's been a mad rush to get each episode to air, giving ourselves barely any time. Obviously, it's very demanding, and it's very easy to go over budget in that situation. But this recent shift in our production schedule should give our budget management, as well as working conditions for cast and crew, a big refresh, so to speak.

We've decided to set this new schedule with Gavv and stick to it over the following years, with all our upcoming projects planned around this. We've been running these franchises for 50 years, but this is totally new for us—Even though I feel like we should have made the change years ago.

What are your thoughts on Kamen Rider Gotchard?

Shirakura: Well, Producer [Yousuke] Minato was under me when we worked on [Avataro Sentai] Donbrothers, so this was his first time being Chief Producer. Obviously, it's got a bit of a school setting, as well as a very young cast, so I think it's a show that's got a youthful energy to it.

The title of the show, Gotchard, was something Minato really pushed for. There were a lot of objections to it. When it came to deciding the all-important title, though, he wasn't forceful about it, but he made it clear he felt really strongly about "Gotchard". [laughs] He said that, along with Decade and Ex-Aid, it can be a sub-series of shows that end in ド (-do). So he pushed the objections aside… In a way, I see that as a sign of how reliable he could be.

How has the shift in the production schedule affected Kamen Rider Gavv?

Shirakura: One of the reasons for Gavv's production shift is China's censorship system. That's where the piracy problem is biggest, and it takes quite a while to pass the censorship process, so we thought we'd give ourselves a three-month lead. We weren't able to pass censorship by September, but finally, as of October 13th, the show has been simulcast day-and-date in Japan and China. This means, for the first time, the official release could make it out before the pirated versions, which I'm really glad we managed to do.

But beating piracy is really just one part of it. As the producer, [Naomi] Takebe tells me, it's had a great overall effect. One major example is the cast. The rushed schedule we had before meant episodes had an extremely fast turnaround. By giving ourselves more lead time, filming Gavv before anyone else knew about it, it gave everyone several months to focus solely on Gavv. Of course, when it aired, all the comments would come, and the interviews and press tours… A sudden influx of noise, for lack of a better term. But, until then, that's three extra months the cast has to focus on their work, their characters. That's the best thing about it.

It also helps with the promotional materials. Take the videos we make to announce the show: We had a lot more material to work with this time, and the CGI was even finalized in time for those trailers. The same goes for the previews at the end of each episode. Even Takebe wondered why didn't do this ages ago. "Why have we been rushing ourselves like this? Why were we so stuck in our ways?" It's really a dark side of Toei no one can understand.

This is the big one. Talk to us about the winter movie.

Shirakura: This year, we're releasing the Fuuto PI movie, and in the new year, there's the Gotchard V-Cinext. As for the so-called "winter movies" we've done each year since 2009, there won't be one. Nor next year, most likely. We're reorganizing the structure, which is getting into Character Strategy again.

So, there's the summer movies, winter movies, and we used to have spring movies as well. Now we have V-Cinexts, which are usually epilogues at the end of a show's run, or movies we make for anniversaries. But there's also stuff like Fuuto PI, or Shin Kamen Rider, which are in their own categories. There's a need to put a structure to all of that. This question is about Kamen Rider, but we're applying this mindset elsewhere, too, of course.

When we talk about Rider movies, though, including V-Cinexts, the question is, what's the demographic? Who are we targeting? Who'll enjoy this? These are questions we've struggled with 'till last year. We need to be more clear about our audience and make things for different demographics to enjoy. We're just starting to do that now, and there's still a lot I can't say, but we have multiple projects in the works right now which we'll start announcing in 2025. Please look forward to those.

Can you give us any specifics?

Shirakura: To be more specific… Well, I can't be that specific, but we'll have something based on the series on TV, a so-called "anniversary" project based on a prior TV series, and something that isn't based on any show at all. So those three projects are all being worked on.

This is because we realized that only the people who follow the TV shows understand our movies. So we're reflecting on that. The core fans will obviously show up for our spring, summer, and winter movies, but with the number of Riders increasing, some people, even us, will forget about certain Riders, and their forms, etc… That's not a big problem for the super dedicated fans, but the average viewer will be completely lost. Lately, it's been feeling more like we've been alienating part of the audience.

That's why, and this is just my way of putting it… We should make things that old people like me can enjoy, too. I honestly think it's important that someone who's not watching the show could catch the trailer and think, "Wow! That movie looks interesting!"

The things that triggered this line of thought are probably [Kamen Rider] Black Sun and Shin Kamen Rider. We've had some experience now — and I'm not saying we'll make stuff like those again — but we're making movies that anyone can enjoy, movies that can stand on their own. We've got a few of those lined up, so I hope everyone can look forward to them.

Tell us about Super Sentai's future as we come into its 50th anniversary.

Shirakura: Next year, 2025, will be the first Super Sentai series' 50th anniversary year.

Super Sentai up 'till now— Let's use [Kikai Sentai] Zenkaiger and its "#45 Bang!" as an example— We've celebrated anniversaries based on the number of series, but I'd like to start celebrating based on the actual years. The reason being… Also, [Pirate Sentai] Gokaiger was heavily pushed for being the 35th series, which begs the question, "why all the emphasis on the numbers that end in 5, like 35 and 45?" It's because we wanted to match with Kamen Rider.

I forget whose idea it was, probably Suzuki Takeyuki, I think, but we've been doing these "double anniversaries". We say it's to celebrate both Rider and Sentai, but we just don't want Rider taking all the spotlight. So that's what we've been doing, but I think it's best if we stopped coupling Rider and Sentai together so much. Rider and Sentai should each have their own space. That's why we're revamping the way we count these.

[laughs] Besides, if we're honest, we're not even sure how many Sentai there are anymore. It's all LuPat's fault, really, [referring to Thief Sentai Lupinranger VS Police Sentai Patranger] because now the amount of years, the amount of shows, and the amount of Sentai all no longer match each other!

It's not really a total reset or anything, but we're ignoring the number of series and number of teams and just celebrating the actual anniversaries from now on. Though, I guess it works out, because considering LuPat, next up is the 50th Sentai and the 50th anniversary year, and this isn't a chance we'll ever get again.

What can you tell us about the Super Sentai series airing in 2025?

Shirakura: In 2025, after Boonboomger finishes its run, it'll be followed by a new show starring a new Sentai.

A while ago, I was outside Toei when I ran into this guy Ricardo, from Brazil. I was like, "I haven't seen you in six years!", and he told me "Shirakura! I heard about the new Sentai!"

Oh? Looks like someone's here...

(The second part of this interview will release on TTFC on December 29th)

[french-unknown]

Hii can I please request a headcanon of Zoro, Shanks, Smoker, Ace x f!Reader? About their relationship with s/o after 20 or 30 years? Like getting old, getting used to each other, bored of the relationship, or happy being together... Angst/fluff anything is fine. Please feel free to change my request to your liking. Thank you 🧡🤍

𝐂𝐇𝐀𝐑𝐀𝐂𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐒: zoro, shanks, smoker, ace 𝐂/𝐖: fluff, light hurt 𝐀/𝐍: Hope you will like it! ʕ￫ᴥ￩ʔ 𝐖/𝐂: 830

| m a s t e r l i s t | - | p t . 2 |

✧ You are the quintessential little routine couple.

Indeed, even if he has become the best swordsman in the world, he still remains the same mosshead who spends his days training, drinking and sleeping. For your part, now that you installed the land to test a few years ago, you have also established your routine. You spend your days separately and you get together in the evening to talk about it over a bottle of sake.

✧ The evening bottle together is a tradition in your relationship!

✧ The Straw Hats, especially Luffy, move into your home every time they pass nearby. The sofa becomes their kingdom.

✧ The only time your voice rises is when you have to decide who does the dishes, the cleaning or the meal. Neither of you likes doing housework so it ends up being "who did it last time?"

✧ You have a hammock in the garden so you can nap there together on peaceful sunny days.

✧ He will still love you just as much despite the years, now that he has fulfilled his dream, he greatly appreciates the tranquility and calm of a life together far from everything.

✧ The sea remains the first of its mistresses so, if you decide to withdraw from piracy, it will be the end of your relationship with him. He will still try at first to continue the relationship at a distance but it will eventually run out of steam and he will give up.

He doesn't want to put you through the hassle of keeping yourself to himself when he can't be there for you.

✧ You still have a child together by accident and he is the happiest father in the world.

✧ He even try to stay on land with you in order to start your family. However, the call of the sea is too strong and you woke up one morning with the bed cold and an "I'm sorry" note left on the pillow.

✧ He will remain present in your child's life by requesting some sort of shared custody.

He will use his time over half the year to take them on his boat. He will live his family life by giving them the experience of some adventures at his side as well as the life of a pirate. These moments are the most precious to him even if the moment when he brings his child back to you and leaves, leaving you behind, tears his heart a little more each time.

✧ The sea is a jealous and cruel lover.

✧ Above all, he is a man who believes in his work and is totally devoted to it. He thus spends most of his time in his office or with his colleagues.

✧ It didn't bother you at the beginning of the relationship because you thought it was temporary. But no.

He would come home very late in the evening and go back to work before you opened your eyes in the morning. And that was if he came home to sleep at your place. Sometimes he would just sleep at work or go away for weeks on business trips.

✧ This, coupled with his unaffectionate behavior, made you doubt his feelings after a few years. The arguments started and he grew tired of coming home only to hear criticism.

As a result, he came home even less.

✧ You ended up breaking up after a few years of dating.

✧ He was quite satisfied with it at first because you had annoyed him so much by reproaching him that he didn't even remember why he had loved you in the first place. He freely drowned himself in work the first year then, returning home one evening, he remembered why he had loved you so much while the loneliness was eating away at him little by little.

He had made a mistake.

✧ No matter the years or time that pass, he still loves you with puppy love like the first day.

Wherever you step, he will worship the ground you walk on as long as his heart beats. He says sweet words to you every morning and, every time you wake up, he will be there cuddling you and looking at you with wonder. He will never stop loving you.

✧ He takes you on dates very regularly so that you always have your own time and takes great care of it. If you have children, he leaves them in Dadan's care for the evening.

✧ He wants to have children quickly enough in your relationship to build his family with you. However, your two children will be adopted because he refuses to pass on his genes for fear of bringing bad luck to his children.

To strengthen the family, Luffy and Sabo are your children's godfathers while Dadan and Makino are their godmothers.

✧ He is more confident about your feelings for him than when he was younger, which means he is more confident in your relationship.

✧ He pesters you endlessly for having a dog so watch out!

𝐉𝐎𝐈𝐍 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐓𝐀𝐆𝐋𝐈𝐒𝐓 𝐈𝐅 𝐘𝐎𝐔 𝐃𝐎𝐍'𝐓 𝐖𝐀𝐍𝐓 𝐓𝐎 𝐌𝐈𝐒𝐒 𝐀𝐍𝐘 𝐔𝐏𝐃𝐀𝐓𝐄

𝐓𝐀𝐆𝐋𝐈𝐒𝐓: @iheartamora @bontensh0e @opchara @lys-ada @xomingyu @dozcan123

[crowdusk]

it’s so interesting to me that vegapunk called joyboy the first pirate if we think about what that actually means.

it would make sense that in this case piracy is defined by what seems to be the “true meaning” in one piece — being free, and being on the sea. luffy becomes a pirate to be free, he defines the king of the pirates as the freest person in the world, joyboy is of course linked to complete freedom and liberation.

so joyboy took to the sea, which seems to have been something no one before him did (at least not as a lifestyle, maybe for trade and stuff), and did it in order to be free. we also know he was affiliated with (and potentially came from) the ancient kingdom, but probably decided to stop living there to become a pirate. so, to him, living on land/in the ancient kingdom was also restrictive.

we know the ancient kingdom had highly advanced technology (with a sustainable fire/solar source), and was essentially already living in the future (something maybe similar to egghead, but even more advanced because of the lack of resource constraints). but clearly, it had rules and maybe roles that someone like joyboy and luffy would have still found stifling.

the other thing that’s itching my brain is the relationship to the sea. we know that the sun/sea dynamic is important and symbolic in one piece in many different ways. the sun represents freedom, but so does the sea in some ways (at least living on it in the way pirates do). pirates (in the true/joyboy sense) live at the confluence of that freedom of sun and sea — you have to have both. not be trapped under the sea like fishmen, where certain resources are scarce, and not be bound to land where there are rules, structures, responsibilities and duties. even when those structures aren’t oppressive (like they currently are under the tenryuubito) they’re not what some people would consider freedom either.

so!! we know the sea is important. we know it’s likely only this planet has a sea/oceans (for example the moon doesn’t). the sea represents mother nature to some extent. we also know the sea is deadly to/hates devil fruit users, because they are unnatural (as material representations of people’s dreams). the sea, mother nature, is to some extent the material reality of the world — dreams can the impossible possible, can make almost anything real, are so so powerful, but they still have their limits in nature and the tangible world. there has to be balance.

this is also where we see the difference between luffy and blackbeard — blackbeard says there is no end to people’s dreams, luffy talks clearly about the end of his dream and what that looks like. freedom doesn’t mean constant accumulation and infinity and hunger to luffy, it is actually something material, collective and shared with everyone in the world. freedom is something everyone chooses for themselves in their own way, but freedom requires material conditions to be met (food, safety, companionship etc). and it is for everyone, not just the strong or the few lucky ones.

this is where i have been thinking about imu and the gorosei, and the theories around them. i know the main theory is that imu is linked to the sea somehow, and probably a/the sea devil. i don’t fully disagree, but i don’t think a) imu is the sea itself, more likely has managed to harness its power somehow. because to me the sea in one piece has to be a neutral, natural balancing force. and b) i think that if imu is closely linked to the sea, they can’t have made the devil fruits (ive seen that theory too). that wouldn’t make sense, since those two things are naturally enemies/opposed. and if vegapunk’s theory is right, devil fruits are unnaturally evolved from people’s dreams, which again contradicts the laws of nature/the sea. also, just in naming, the enemies of the gorosei are always called “devils” (of ohara, potentially the will of D), so it wouldn’t make sense for imu to have made the devil fruits (unless they did make them/their initial aspects but they were stolen or turned against them somehow). it still makes more sense to me that devil fruits came out of the ancient kingdom.

i do think imu is linked to the sea in that they want to use it for their purposes, i.e. flooding the world, and it’s strongly hinted they’ve done so before during the void century. they have some level of connection to it and maybe power over it (via the island-destroying weapon which is probably uranus). their preferred way of “cleansing the world” is through using the sea. but it’s also interesting that they want to be as far from it as possible, with marie geoise being high up and well-protected from the sea. to me imu is a “sea devil” (even in the imagery it’s clearly similar to an umiboshi) in the sense that it can use the sea to its purposes of control and destruction of freedom and dreams. i’m dubious that imu has a particular magical/power connection to the sea, but i could be very wrong on that.

to me pirates’ and joyboy’s connection to the sea, including their affiliations with the people of the sea (fishpeople, merpeople, etc) is actually much better stronger and deeper, even if it isn’t always a harmonious one. pirates and devil fruit users fear the sea to some extent because they respect it, and still they choose to be in relationship to it, just as they choose to be in relationship to risk, danger and death. they know it’s something that can check them, something that can take everything away. and that’s a much healthier, balanced relationship to something that is a pure, immense force of nature. nature humbles us, nature isn’t always nice, nature takes as much as it gives. that’s important, i think.

i would really love to see that last part play out somehow, in showing that people like joyboy, luffy etc can work with the sea and adapt to it. we’ve had hints of that with noah, and wano. the answer isn’t to isolate/save yourself and kill everyone else by keeping them down, it’s to work together to adapt. and i would love to see imu and the gorosei’s use of the sea for control and oppression fail in their world-flooding/cleansing plan because they haven’t accounted for people’s ability to do that.

the sea isn’t something you can escape or fight or fully control, it’s something you can only try and shape your own relationship to. you can’t fuck with the rules and cycles of the elemental force that is the sea, as we see with devil fruits. it is unimpressed with pure imagination/desire/dreaming. it says “ok, sure, cool dream. now what are you willing to risk and suffer because you are a part of this dirt-bound, salt-soaked world.” the sea requires body, flesh, blood, bone. the sea is the sacrifice made for the dream, the price you will pay if you reach the hubris of thinking you are beyond human and humanity. if the sun is the flame of hope and desire living in the heart, the sea is the muscle and sinew that has to carry the dream, and pay for it too.

(incidentally, this is also why i feel very sure the gorosei and imu actually are shit scared of the sea. we know the gorosei af least would be vulnerable to it too so i hope it gets them somehow lol).

there’s something perverse and twisted in imu’s use of the mother flame (something derived from the sun) for destruction, and i think their use of the sea parallels that to some extent. the sea, just as much as the sun, should not be controlled/used for those purposes. the sea represents a form of freedom too — what is, and changes, and supports the world like a shifting foundation. the sun is the freedom of what could be, what’s unreachable and intangible but consistently shining.

anyways it might be that the flooding just doesn’t come to fruition because luffy kills imu and the gorosei, which would make part of my theory moot (i wouldn’t be mad about it). but i also wouldn’t be surprised if we at least get some more sea level rise before that, to the point where it seriously starts to harm and endanger people.

just my insane rambling braindump after chapter 1114!! idk if it makes any sense but if you’ve actually read this far i am sending you flowers ✨

[poison-ives777]

⚠️Ofmd S2 spoilers ahead⚠️

I’m just gonna say it:

Season 2 was painfully rushed. I didn’t wanna admit that fault, but it REALLY damaged the quality of the show. Part of what made S1 so great was watching the slow and steady character development and story arcs. We developed attachments to the characters because we saw them go through everything leading up to the end.

This entire season has had abrupt changes in character development (especially with Izzy. I love that they made him more human, but he went from masochistically devoted to Edward to terrified of Edward all within the span of a time jump we didn’t even see.)

Ed and Stede’s relationship shifts way too abruptly. And I know them taking it fast is part of their arc, but it still felt like they were just trying to move from arc to arc within the span of one episode each.

I also hate how none of the sideplots really tie into the story on a deeper level. (They have amazing parallels to S1, but aren’t great plot-wise.) Not to mention they almost completely abandoning the relationship they built between Olu and Jim. (I love the polyamory aspect, don’t get me wrong. And I love that they don’t blatantly explain the polyamory / tokenize it. But, the way Jim was willing to just give away Olu to Zheng in episode seven, even if they and Archie couldn’t go with him, made me upset. Not to mention that at times, it feels more like they’re trying to write off Jim and Olu as fwb, but that may just be me. And the two of them didn’t get a lot of screen time in general compared to season 1.)

The parallels to season 1 and overall symbolism were amazing, and I do still like this season overall. But it really is heartbreaking how Max sacrificed the show’s quality all for the sake of profit. I know David could have done much better with more resources.

The main reason this upsets me so much is because not only does it hurt on a personal level (damaging the quality of my comfort media), but it’s also the perfect representation of how streaming is KILLING the quality of TV. S1 was a masterpiece. The whole show is a masterpiece. But TV productions can only work with so much. And streaming services aren’t willing to accommodate to the demands necessary to make real art.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk. Be gay, do piracy 🏴‍☠️🍊🧜‍♂️(for legal reasons, don’t actually do piracy)

[avelera]

I saw a really cute post the other day imagining scenes where Ed protects Stede. It was sweet and funny and heartfelt and for some reason landed all wrong with me.

Then I figured out why: I don’t think Ed has ever protected Stede. It’s actually kind of a big plot point in the show. Even when he should have. But when Stede protects Ed is when Ed fell in love.

It’s a bit of a nuance and I’m too tired to quite remember all the ways I’m probably wrong but… Ed often rescues Stede. But he doesn’t protect him. He doesn’t prevent him or try to prevent him from doing things that would harm him.

I think that was another reason the post nagged at me. Because the funny examples were around Stede’s failures at piracy. But Ed, unlike everyone on the show, including the viewers!, doesn’t see Stede as a failure. It’s almost weird how much he doesn’t. It’s endearing too. It’s why the romance works.

Ed thinks Stede is unorthodox. New to the game. A bit rough around the edges. But all those skills come with time and practice. Ed is bored of skilled, practiced pirates. He wants flare. He wants daring. He wants a person who does it their own way. The rest will come. But you can’t teach creativity. Ed doesn’t give a shit about a perfectly skilled pirate, that’s boring as fuck. He wants to see a creative one.

To go back to protectiveness… Ed doesn’t protect Stede because he doesn’t see Stede as incompetent. He doesn’t prevent Stede from doing things before the fact. But sometimes after the fact like on the Spanish ship or against the English, he’ll come in after Stede fucked up and chooses to join him in facing the danger and consequences.

In comedy terms, Ed is very “yes, and…!” with Stede. Whereas protectiveness implies a certain amount of ending the bit before Ed can see the crazy places it’s going.

By contrast, Stede is protective of Ed and when he’s protective, Ed melts. Stede tries to prevent Ed from being hurt by the nobles and corrects his errors and very publicly destroys them on Ed’s behalf. Ed fell or fell harder in love right there. But Ed never tried to prevent Stede’s run in with the Spanish.

Ed’s a bit selfish, a bit blind to how to take care of others. Part of it’s the life he led. It’s part of why he’s so fascinated by Stede and his brand of piracy. He doesn’t want to stop the craziness before it begins. He really only steps in if death itself, something that might end Strede’s craziness, gets close but even then. He doesn’t protect Stede against Izzy. He lets those consequences play out. He can’t bear to look but he doesn’t stop it.

I think there’s more nuance and a lot of scenes I’m sure I’m forgetting where Ed is more protective but my overall sense is that this is actually an interesting nuance between them. Stede acted out of protectiveness when he left Ed on that beach. Ed didn’t go looking for Stede. He didn’t and doesn’t try to protect him. Unlike everyone else, Ed always assumes Stede’s choices are deliberate and competently made.

[rollinouttahere-writes]

Hi since I know Sanji is your husband ; how about A , b , I , k , l for him please 💗 👀😈

It's funny, even though he's my husband, I almost never write him as a yandere lol

Affection: How do they show their love and affection? How intense would it get?

God, how doesn't he show his affection? He's always got a hand on you when he isn't cooking, he acts as if you'll perish if he doesn't kiss you every five minutes, he's constantly doing your work for you, and, of course, he makes all of your meals and snacks. You don't have to lift a finger with him around. On top of that, you don't go a day without him singing your praise or showering you with compliments.

He's also a big fan of taking you shopping. He loves to pick out new clothes for you that he thinks will further add to your beauty. Anything that you so much as glance at will be yours.

The never ending onslaught of love and affection is suffocating to say the least. Sanji loves intensely. He's desperate to make you feel loved, and it never occurs to him that he's going too far or that you may not even want it.

Blood: How messy are they willing to get when it comes to their darling?

There is nothing that he won't do in the name if protecting his darling. He doesn't care how messy it gets so long as that means that you'll be out of harm's way. He will try to make it quick, though. Not out of mercy, but because he wants to get back to you as soon as possible.

Ideals: What kind of future do they have in mind for/with their darling?

This man is constantly fantasizing about his future with you, and he has no problem telling you about it. As much as he loves being a part of the Straw Hats, he does want to find a place to settle down with you after Luffy has become the pirate king and the crew has decided to retire from piracy. Ideally, this home would be in the All Blue and be a floating craft that doubles as a restaurant like the Baratie. He talks ceaselessly about how much fun it will be to decorate it with you and make it your home. Any opposition you have to this is severely downplayed or misinterpreted into something else entirely because Sanji is the reigning king of being delusional.

More likely than not, you guys will be married within a year of meeting. Sanji is desperate to be your husband and spends all of your relationship trying to prove to you what a good husband he will be. Can't you see how doting and caring he is? Doesn't that make you want to grow old with him?

Sanji is extremely eager to have children. Like having a baby before the first anniversary levels of excitement. Every time he sees a child in public or you interact with one, he's dropping very blatant hints about you two having one of your own some day. You two will have children some day, it's an inevitability. And refusal on your part is taken as you just being nervous and needing a little persuasion.

Kisses: How do they act around or with their darling?

He acts completely whipped. He's the most lovesick man the world has ever seen. The man will kiss your feet if you don't kick him away. He's constantly finding any opportunity he can to hug and kiss you. If your back isn't to a wall, he's hugging you from behind and taking the opportunity to smell your hair.

Of course, he's also making you food around the clock. If you were skinny when you met him, you won't be for long. He acts as if hearing your stomach growl is what failure sounds like. You get an extra large portion for each meal, and he's constantly bombarding you with snack in between meals.

Love letters: How would they go about courting or approaching their darling?

He comes on strong and unrelenting. You're his beloved, perfect god(dess), and he is not going to let you slip between his fingers. He gets you extravagant bouquets every time you're on land, and he'll usually buy you a few other gifts while he's at it. He'll wax poetic about how perfect you are and how much he loves you for hours on end. You're under a full frontal assault of love bombing with no end in sight. This is also the point when he starts doing the food thing mentioned in the previous letter.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Doublethink sump linkdump

On OCTOBER 23 at 7PM, I'll be in DECATUR, presenting my novel THE BEZZLE at EAGLE EYE BOOKS.

Trigger warning for #eikositriophobia: this is my 23d linkdump (Hail Discordia!), an erratic Saturday purge of the open tabs I haven't managed to blog this week; here's the previous 22:

https://pluralistic.net/tag/linkdump/

When I was a kid, I idolized Harlan Ellison. I loved his prose styling, his stage presence, the way he blended activism and fiction, and the way he mixed critical nonfiction with fiction. As a 17 year old, I attended a writing workshop that Ann Crispin was giving at a local science fiction convention and she told me that I had the makings of a great writer, just as soon as I stopped trying to be Harlan Ellison.

But Harlan was a complicated figure. I attended the Clarion Workshop in 1992 specifically because he was our instructor, and came away bitterly disillusioned after he targeted one of my fellow students for relentless, cruel bullying, a performance that was so ugly that the board fired the director and permanently barred him from teaching the workshop.

Later on, Harlan became the kind of copyright maximalist who called for arbitrary internet surveillance and censorship in the name of shutting down ebook piracy. During a panel about this at a sf convention, he called one of the other panelists a "motherfucker" and threatened to punch him in the face. He took to badmouthing me in interviews, painting my position – whose nuances he certainly understood – in crude caricature.

But Harlan and I had many friends in common, people I really liked, and they were adamant that Harlan's flaws were not the whole story: if Harlan liked you, he would do anything to stand up for you, no matter the cost to himself. Famously, when Harlan taught Octavia Butler's Clarion, he demanded to know why she wasn't writing full time, and she replied that there was the inconvenient matter of making rent and groceries. He replied, "If that's all that's stopping you, come live in my guest house for as long as it takes, eat my groceries, and write." Which she did.

Which is great, but also: one of my own Clarion students told me about when his then-teenaged mother met Harlan at a sf convention and told him that she dreamed of becoming a writer, and he propositioned her. She was so turned off that she stopped writing forever (her son, my student, is now an accomplished writer).

So Harlan was a mixed bag. He did very, very good things. He did very, very bad things. When Harlan died, in 2018, I wrote an obit where I grappled with these two facts:

https://memex.craphound.com/2018/06/28/rip-harlan-ellison/

In it, I proposed a way of thinking about people that tried to make sense of both Harlans – and of all the people in our lives. There's an unfortunate tendency to think of the people that matter to us as having their deeds recorded in a ledger, with good deeds in one column and wicked deeds down the other.

In this formulation, we add up the good deeds and the bad deeds and subtract the bad from the good. If the result is a positive number, we say the good outweighs the bad, and therefore the person is, on balance, good. On the other hand, if the bad outweighs the good, then the person is bad, and the good deeds are irrelevant.

This gets us into no end of trouble. It means that when someone we admire slips up, we give them a pass, because "they've earned it." And when someone who's hurt us does something selfless and kind and brave, we treat that as though it doesn't matter, because they're an asshole.

But the truth is, no amount of good deeds can wipe away the bad. If you hurt someone, the fact that you've helped someone else doesn't make that hurt any easier to bear. And the kindnesses you do for other people make their lives better, no matter what bad things you've done to others.

Rather than calculating the balance of our goodness or badness, I think we should just, you know, sit with our sins and virtues. Let all the harm and joy exist in a state of superposition. Don't cancel out the harm. Don't wave away the good. They both exist, neither cancels the other, and we should strive to help more, and to do less harm. We should do everything we can to help those we harm. No one owes us a pass because of the good we've done.

That's the lesson Harlan taught me, and he taught it to me by absolutely failing to live his life this way – a fact that exists alongside all of the good he did, including the great art he made, which I love, and which inspired me.

Not long after Harlan's death, I got a phone call from J Michael Straczynski, Harlan's literary executor. As part of his care for Harlan's literary legacy, Joe was editing a new anthology of short stories, The Last Dangerous Visions, and did I want to contribute a story?

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/harlan-ellison-last-dangerous-vision-1235117069/

Of course I did. Harlan edited Dangerous Visions in 1967: a groundbreaking anthology of uncomfortable science fiction that featured everyone from Philip K Dick to Samuel Delany. The followup, 1972's Again, Dangerous Visions, was, if anything, even more influential, including Le Guin's The Word For World IS Forest, as well as work by Joanna Russ, Kurt Vonnegut, David Gerrold, and James Tiptree, Jr.

Though some of the stories in these books haven't aged well, together, they completely changed my view of what science fiction was and what it could be. But The Last Dangerous Visions was a different (ahem) story. For complicated reasons (which all cashed out to "Harlan being very difficult to work with, sometimes for damned good reasons, other times for completely petty ones), TLDV was, at the time of Harlan's death, fifty years behind schedule. It was "science fiction's most famous unpublished book." Harlan had bought early work from writers who had gone on to have major careers – like Bruce Sterling – and had sat on them for half a century.

Then Joe called me to tell me that he was starting over with TLDV and did I want to contribute a story – and of course I did. I wrote a story for him with the title "Jeffty Is Five," part of my series of stories with the same titles as famous works of sf:

https://locusmag.com/2012/05/cory-doctorow-a-prose-by-any-other-name/

Joe liked the story, but not the title. He thought Harlan wouldn't have approved of this kind of appropriation, and he wanted to do right by the memory of his old friend. My first reaction was very Harlan-like: this is supposed to make you mad, it's my art, and if it offends you, that's your problem.

But I remembered the most important lesson I learned from Harlan, about good deeds and bad ones, and I thought about Joe, a writer I admired and liked, who was grappling with his grief and his commitment to Harlan's legacy, and I changed my mind and told him of course I'd change the title. I changed the title because Harlan would never have done so, and that's rather the point of the story.The story is (now)) called "The Weight of a Heart, the Weight of a Feather" (a very Harlanish title), and it's about the legacy of complicated people, whose lives are full of noble selflessness *and careless or deliberate cruelty. It's about throwing away the ledger and just letting all those facts sit together, about lives that are neither washed of sin by virtue, nor washed of virtue by sin.

It's a good story, I think, and I'm proud of it, and I'm interested in what the rest of you think now that the book is out:

https://www.blackstonepublishing.com/products/book-fyhm

Harlan was the writer who made me want to get good at reading my stories aloud. I was a charter member of the Harlan Ellison Record Club, as you can see for yourself from the time Harlan (accidentally) doxed me:

http://harlanellison.com/text/paladin.txt

After nearly 20 years of podcasting, I'm actually pretty good at this stuff. I'm going to be podcasting a reading of this story – eventually. I am nearly done "de-googling" my podcast feed, ripping it out of Feedburner, a service that I started using nearly two decades ago to convert a WordPress RSS feed to a podcast feed. In the intervening years, WordPress has come to support this natively and Feedburner has become a division of Google, so I've been methodically removing Feedburner's hooks from my feed, which is now proudly available here, without any surveillance or analytics:

https://craphound.com/feeds/doctorow_podcast

I'll be writing up the process eventually. In the meantime, I'm about to embark on another podcast fiction project, serializing my novella Spill, a "Little Brother" story that Tor's Reactor just published:

https://reactormag.com/spill-cory-doctorow/

The first part of "Spill" will go out tomorrow or Monday. Reactor also just published another "Little Brother" story, "Vigilant," which I read in last week's podcast:

https://craphound.com/littlebrother/2024/09/29/vigilant-a-little-brother-story/

One of my long-running beefs with Harlan was his insistence that the answer of copyright infringement online was to create an obligation on intermediaries – like ISPs – to censor their users' communications on demand from anyone claiming to have been wronged by a post or upload.

This would be bad for free expression under any circumstances, but it's an especially dangerous vision for ISPs, who are among the worst-run, most venal businesses in modern society ("We don't care, we don't have to, we're the phone company" -L Tomlin).

It's hard to overstate just how terrible ISPs are, but even in a field that includes Charter and Comcast, there's one company that rises above the pack when it comes to being grotesquely, imaginatively awful: Cox Communications.

Here's the latest from Cox: they sell "unlimited" gigabit data plans that cost $100 for the base plan and $50 to add the "unlimited" data. But – as Jon Brodkin writes for Ars Technica – Cox uniquely defines "unlimited" as severely limited:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/cox-slows-internet-speeds-in-entire-neighborhoods-to-punish-any-heavy-users/

Now, you're probably thinking, ho-hum, another company that offered unlimited service and then acted like dicks when a customer treated it as unlimited, ::laughs in American Airlines::

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesasquith/2019/11/13/unlimited-first-class-flights-for-lifehow-american-airlines-made-the-most-expensive-mistake-in-aviation-history/

But that's not the Cox story! Cox doesn't just throttle "unlimited" customers' internet to 2006-vintage DSL speeds – they slow down the entire neighborhood around the unlimited customer to those speeds.

As Brodkin writes, every Cox customer in the same neighborhood as an "unlimited" customer named "Mike" had their upload speeds reduced by more than two thirds, from 35mbps to 10mbps, to punish Mike. And they're not the only ones!

https://www.reddit.com/r/GNV/comments/gkicjg/comment/fr670cx/

Cox confirmed they were doing this, saying "performance can be improved for all customers in the neighborhood by temporarily increasing or maintaining download speeds and changing upload speeds for some of our service tiers."

Cox has been on a roll lately, really going for the shitty-telecoms-company gold. Back in August, 404 Media published a leaked pitch deck in which Cox promised advertisers that they were secretly listening to their customers' smart devices, transcribing their private conversations, and using them to target ads:

https://www.404media.co/heres-the-pitch-deck-for-active-listening-ad-targeting/

This isn't just appalling, it's also almost certainly fraudulent. As terrible as "smart" devices are (and oh God are they terrible), the vast majority of them don't do this. That's something a lot of security researchers have investigated, doing things like hooking up a protocol analyzer to a LAN with a smart device on it and looking for data transmissions that correspond to ambient speech in earshot of the gadget's mic.

My guess is that Cox has done a deal with a couple of the bottom-feedingest "smart TV" companies (as a cable operator, Cox will have relationships with a lot of these companies) to engage in this conduct. Smart TVs have emerged as one of the worst categories of consumer technology, on every axis: performance, privacy, repairability. The field has raced to the bottom, hit it, and then started digging to find new lows to sink to. This is just my hunch here, but I think it's highly likely that if there's a class of devices that are bugging your living room and selling the data to Cox, it's gonna be a smart TV (top tip: buy a computer monitor instead, and use your phone or laptop to stream to it).

Ask a certain kind of very smooth-brained, Samuelson-pilled economist about the enshittification of smart TVs and they'll tell you that this is a "revealed preference":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revealed_preference

As in, sure, you may say that you don't want your TV to secretly record your private conversations and sell them to Cox, but actually you quite like it, because you have a TV.

While this is a facially very stupid argument, it's routinely made by people who think they're very smart, a point famously made by Matt Bors's "Mr Gotcha":

https://thenib.com/mister-gotcha/

Comics turn out to be a very good medium for stringing up the revealed preferences crowd on their own petards. This week, Juan Santapau's "The Secret Knots" added to the Mr Gotcha canon with an equally brilliant webcomic, albeit one with a very different vibe, entitled "Remind Me Later":

https://thesecretknots.com/comic/remind-me-later/

Santapau really catches the zeitgeist with this one, which is more of a slow burn than a zinger, and which shows how online "revealed preferences" nonsense grooms us for the same bullshit in every corner of our lives, even our psychotherapist's office. Highly recommended – an instant classic.

"Revealed preferences" comes from the Chicago School of Economics, a field that decided that a) economics should be a discipline grounded in mathematical models; and b) it was impossible to factor power relationships into these models; so c) power doesn't matter.

Once you understand this fact, everything else snaps into focus – like, why the Chicago School loves monopolies. If you model an economy dominated by monopolists without factoring the power that monopolists wield, then you can very easily assume that any monopoly you discover is the result of a lot of people voluntarily choosing to spend all their money with the company they love best.

The fact that we all hate the monopolists we have to deal with is dismissed by these economists as a mirage: "sure, you say you hate them, but you do business with them, therefore, your 'revealed preference' shows that you actually love them."

Which is how we end up with absolutely outrageous rackets like the scholarly publishing cartel. Scholarly journals acquire academics' work for free; get other academics to edit the work for free; acquire lifetime copyright to those finished works; and charge the institutions that paid those "volunteer" academics salaries millions of dollars to access their publications:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/08/16/the-public-sphere/#not-the-elsevier

These companies don't just lock up knowledge and tie an anchor around the scientists' and scholars' ankles, dragging them down. Their market power means that they can hurt their customers and users in every way, including through rampant privacy violations.

A new study from SPARC investigates the privacy practices of Springerlink, and finds them to be a cesspit of invasive, abusive conduct that would make even a Cox executive blush:

https://zenodo.org/records/13886473

Yes, on the one hand, this isn't surprising. If a company can screw you on pricing, why wouldn't they scruple to give you the shaft on privacy as well? But The fact that a company as terrible as Springer can be the dominant firm in the sector is still shocking, somehow.

But that's terminal-stage capitalism for you. It's not just that bad companies companies thrive – it's that being a bad company is a predictor of sky-high valuations and fawning coverage from the finance press.

Take Openai, a company that the press treats as a heptillion-dollar money-printer whose valuation will eventually exceed the rest of the known universe. Openai has a lot of problems – a mass exodus of key personnel, a product that doesn't work for nearly all the things it's claimed as a solution to – but the biggest one is that it's a bad business.

That's the theme of a fantastic, characteristically scathing-but-deep Ed Zitron article called (what else?) "Openai is a bad business":

https://www.wheresyoured.at/oai-business/

Zitron does something that no one else in the business press does: takes Openai's claims about its business fundamentals – its costs, its prices, its competitors, and even its capabilities – at face value, and then asks, "Even if this is all true, will Openai ever turn a profit?"

The answer is a pretty convincing "no." Zitron calls it a "subprime AI crisis" in a nod to Tim Hwang's must-read 2020 book about the ad-tech bezzle, Subprime Attention Crisis:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/12/06/surveillance-tulip-bulbs/#adtech-bubble

The fascinating thing about both Zitron and Hwang's analysis isn't that there are big companies that suck – it's that they are able to suck up so much money and credulous excitement, despite how badly they suck.

That's where power – the thing that neoliberal economists say doesn't matter – comes in. Monopoly power is a self-accelerating flywheel, as Amazon's famous investor pitch explains:

https://vimeo.com/739486256/00a0a7379a

Once a monopolist or a cartel wields market power, they can continue to dominate a sector, even though they're very bad – and even if they use their power to rip off both their customers and very powerful suppliers.

That's the lesson of Michael Jordan's lawsuit against NASCAR, as Matt Stoller explains in his latest BIG newsletter:

https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/michael-jordan-anti-monopolist

Jordan is one of the most famous basketball players, but after retiring from the game, he became a NASCAR owner, and as such, has been embroiled in a monopoly whose abuses are both eerily familiar to anyone who pays attention to, say the pharmacy benefit manager racket:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/09/23/shield-of-boringness/#some-men-rob-you-with-a-fountain-pen

But on the other hand, the fact this is all happening to race-cars and not pharmacies makes it very weird indeed. As with, say, PBMs, NASCAR's monopoly isn't just victimizing the individuals who watch racing, but also the racecar teams. These teams are owned by rich, powerful people (like Jordan), but are "almost always on the verge of bankruptcy."

Why is that? NASCAR rips them off. For example, teams have to buy all their parts from NASCAR, at huge markups, and the purchase contract prohibits them from racing at any rival event. There are a million petty schemes like this, and NASCAR carefully titrates its bleed-off to leave its victims almost at death's door, but still (barely) solvent enough to keep racing.

NASCAR also bought out all the rival leagues, and most of the tracks, and then locked the remaining tracks to exclusivity deals. Then the teams all had to sign noncompetes as a condition of competing in NASCAR, the only game in town – forever.

Hence Michael Jordan, a person who steadfastly refused to involve himself in politics during his basketball career, becoming a firebreathing trustbuster. Stoller cites Jordan's transformation as reason to believe that the anti-monopoly agenda will survive even in the event that Harris wins but bows to corporate donors who insist on purging the Biden administration's trustbusters.

That's a hopeful note, and I'd add my own to it: the fact that the NASCAR scam is so similar to the pharma swindles, academic publishing swindles, and all the other monopoly rip-offs means that there is a potential class alliance between university professors, NASCAR owners, and people with chronic health conditions and big pharmaceutical bills.

That high note brings me to the end of this week's linkdump! And here's a little dessert in case you've got room for one more little link: Kitowares "Medieval Mules", a forthcoming clog styled as trompe l'oeil plate armor:

https://www.kitowares.la/

Pair with old favorites like lycra armor leggings:

https://loricaclothing.com/collections/leggings-1/products/the-augsburg-legging

And a DIY crotcheted knight's helmet:

https://www.etsy.com/listing/590854477/knights-helmet-w-detachable-visor

Tor Books as just published two new, free LITTLE BROTHER s tories: VIGILANT, about creepy surveillance in distance education; a nd 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/2024/10/05/farrago/#jeffty-is-five