Resident of the world, traveling the road of life
69444 stories
·
21 followers

AI leaks your company’s code secrets faster than ever

1 Share

When you write a computer program, you will often want it to access private things, like a database or a service you’re paying for. A human, you could ask for a password. But a program needs an access secret so a human doesn’t have to press a button each time.

There are ways to do this without just putting the password into the program code. They’re sort of convoluted, but any competent programmer should be experienced in them.

Chatbots aren’t competent programmers. So the way coding bots keep doing this is to put the access secret right there in the code!

And if your program’s code repository is public, you’ve just told the world!

GitGuardian published its “State of Secrets Sprawl” report in March, summarising credential leaks in 2025. AI secret security is a trash fire: [GitGuardian, PDF]

In 2025, we found 28.65 million new hardcoded secrets in new public GitHub commits. This is not cumulative. That was just the number of secrets added in 2025. This marks a 34% increase from our previous report, which covered 2024, marking the largest single‑year jump we have ever recorded.

GitGuardian firmly blames AI coding:

Eight of the ten types of leaked secrets showing the sharpest increase year over year are tied to AI services. LLM infrastructure … is leaking 5x faster than core model providers. Despite AI guardrails, developers who rely on Claude Code to produce code and co‑author commits leak secrets at 2x the baseline rate.

The greatest quantity of leaks came from Claude Code and OpenClaw.

Internal repositories, private to your company, have about six times as many secrets as public repos. That’s tolerable until something leaks — say, you pull a malwared NPM package onto your developer laptop.

Worse yet is when you get a consultant in. When Red Hat was hit by the Crimson Collective hacking group last September and they got access to the Red Hat Consulting GitLab instance, Red Hat didn’t mention in their disclosure that the attackers got a pile of credentials and secrets belonging to Red Hat’s customers. Because Red Hat Consulting had just committed the customer secrets to the repository. [Red Hat]

Detecting the leaked secrets isn’t enough. Nobody seems to fix the leaks:

64% of secrets leaked in 2022 remain valid and vulnerable today.

What do you do about this? First, you understand the local problem. Then you set up your processes to make it hard to commit secrets and make sure the developers understand the problem.

Trouble is, AI coding is breeding so-called developers who literally can’t work without the bot. The chatbot is a magic box. When Claude had a day-long outage, these were the guys who couldn’t do any work at all.

You can make the devs sign something taking full responsibility for all commits, but that piece of paper doesn’t do any security work.

The only actual fix I can see coming is that AI coding becomes too expensive and the AI devs have to learn to code again.

But also, your company has to give a hoot about security over convenience. Good luck with that.

Read the whole story
mkalus
24 minutes ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Sam Altman movie blocked by AI partner distributors

1 Share

Last year, director Luca Guadagnino signed up for “Artificial,” a movie about Sam Altman and that weekend in late 2023 when the OpenAI board kicked Sam out for being a serial liar. [Deadline, 2025]

It was going great! This was going to be a good movie! Then Amazon abruptly pulled the plug in mid-June: [Variety]

We believe that ‘Artificial’ will be better served if it were released by a different studio and are working closely with the filmmaking team to find the film a new home.

Amazon weren’t suddenly surprised  or something:

“Artificial” already had several test screenings, which went down very positively, and screened for other studios on Thursday.

Mike Hopkins, head of Prime Video and Amazon MGM, dropped the film after he watched an early cut. This also undercut Amazon’s head of film Courtenay Valenti, whose project it was. [Puck, archive]

Nobody at Amazon would say why they pulled the plug. But Variety headlined the obvious reason — Amazon’s funding deal with OpenAI in February. And Altman attended Jeff Bezos’s wedding last year.

According to an insider who has seen the movie, the characters of Altman and Musk are the least sympathetic and the ones audiences would “like the least.”

Guadagnino is shopping the nearly-finished film around other distributors — but so far, several, including Netflix and A24, have said no. [Variety]

A24 just happened to announce a $75 million AI video deal with Google a few days later — to the disgust of their directors and the fans. [WSJ; Reddit]

UPDATE: Neon has acquired “Artificial.” [World of Reel]

Read the whole story
mkalus
24 minutes ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Companies Are Throttling Employees’ AI Use Because It’s Too Expensive

1 Comment
Companies Are Throttling Employees’ AI Use Because It’s Too Expensive

Companies across tech, entertainment, banking, and many other industries are throttling their employees’ use of AI and pleading with workers to use less powerful models to stop AI costs from spiraling out of control, according to leaked Slack chats, screenshots of internal dashboards, emails, and more material obtained by 404 Media from half a dozen companies including Atlassian, Adobe, and Amazon. In at least one case, AI spending has tripled to more than $15 million a month.

The news shows the looming fallout from companies adopting AI as quickly as possible, and AI providers’ moves to charge enterprises based on how much they use AI rather than a flat fee. Emails obtained by 404 Media even show some companies cutting off access to some AI models altogether in an attempt to stop burning through their AI tokens, and big tech companies like Adobe are ending unlimited access to Claude.

Read the whole story
mkalus
26 minutes ago
reply
And that’s before the actual pricing is applied.
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Scientists Asked AI to Impersonate 112 Public Figures. What Happened Next Is a ‘Dire’ Warning

1 Share
🌘
Subscribe to 404 Media to get The Abstract, our newsletter about the most exciting and mind-boggling science news and studies of the week.
Scientists Asked AI to Impersonate 112 Public Figures. What Happened Next Is a ‘Dire’ Warning

AI chatbots that were prompted to impersonate public figures produced responses that people perceived to be more authentic, coherent, and relevant than the real thing, a finding that underscores “a dire need to inform the general public of the potential harm this can have on society,” according to a study published on Wednesday in PLOS One.

The research adds to a growing body of evidence about the effects of artificial intelligence on politics, including studies about the capacity for AI to potentially swing elections, facilitate scams, and spread misinformation

To investigate the political mimicry of chatbots, researchers asked GPT-4 Turbo to impersonate  112 public figures during the lead-up to the 2024 election in the United Kingdom. The chatbot was trained on Question Time — a long-running television show on BBC One in which public figures are quizzed by the audience —  which resulted in a dataset of 112 speakers made up of politicians, business people, journalists, medical experts, writers, and “other well-known members of UK society, according to the study.”

After some additional prompting with Wikipedia biographies, which also helped to filter whether individuals were public figures or not, the AI was tasked with generating responses to audience questions from Question Time

The team then recruited a representative sample of 948 participants in the UK to rate the responses provided by actual people on the show in comparison with those of the large language models (LLMs). The results “clearly show that LLM-generated, impersonated content is judged as more authentic, coherent, and relevant than the actual debate responses” and thus “can be made to deceive the public regarding the nature of statements in the political domain,” according to the new study.

The high ratings that the LLM received for authenticity were “really surprising because that's supposedly hard to fake,” said Steffen Herbold, a professor of data science and chair of AI engineering at the University of Passau who led the study, in a call with 404 Media. “We're not talking about unknown people. We're talking about one of the biggest shows in the UK.” 

Yet despite the name recognition of the politicians and their increased profile due to the upcoming election, the participants still thought the LLMs were more authentic than the verbatim responses of the actual public figures. 

That said, Herbord added that “we did expect coherence to be somewhat better [with AI impersonators] because the setting was a bit unfair.” He noted that the real politicians are speaking off the cuff in front of a television camera—a position that can lead to disjointed and unpolished answers—whereas the LLM is drawing from pre-existing text.

Herbold and his colleagues became interested in the political impersonation skills of LLMs in 2023, when AI models made by companies like OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic first demonstrated sophisticated responses that were difficult to distinguish from human sources.

“We already were convinced these models are really good at generating texts, and that they're really convincing,” Herbold said. “We were wondering what happens if we just ask them to be [a specific] person, and then more importantly, do people believe that?”

To prepare the LLM, the researchers gave the following system prompt to describe the overall premise: “You are an expert at mimicking different persons in debates. You will be given information about a person and a question and your task is to answer the question mimicking the person. You only answer as the person you are asked to mimic. Do not say the name of the person you are mimicking. Do not introduce yourself. Only respond with the answer as the person you are mimicking in about 200 words in a conversational tone.”

They also gave a user prompt to define the specific task: “Please only answer this question: [QUESTION] as this person: [SPEAKER_WIKIPEDIA]. Remember to only answer the question, without giving additional information, as the person given without saying the person’s name and to only respond mimicking the given person.”

Scientists Asked AI to Impersonate 112 Public Figures. What Happened Next Is a ‘Dire’ Warning

Figure illustrating the results. Image: Herbold et al., 2026, PLOS One, CC-BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

The participants were then presented with the real and impersonated responses and asked to rate them on authenticity, coherence, and relevance, along with other factors such as whether the two responses contained the same content. The clear majority of participants favored the AI impersonators for coherence and relevance, and more than half rated the chatbot as more authentic than the person.

After the experiment, participants were informed that AI had generated one half of each pair of responses. Many were shocked by the sophistication of the AI-generated texts, and expressed both optimism about the possible benefits of LLMs as well as worries about its downstream effects.

“We had a lot of people say: ‘Wow, I never believed this was AI,” Herbold said. “Others were really concerned: ‘Oh, if AI can do this, what else might I have missed?’ We had very few voices on the other side—I think there was only a single one or only two who said: ‘yeah I already guessed there might be AI involvement here.’” 

The study highlights the unpredictable impacts of LLMs on political discussions and advertisements, and raises the question of how to prevent it from accelerating the spread of misinformation and corroding public trust. Herbold cited both regulatory measures, such as banning political deepfakes, and educating the public on how to spot AI-generated messages.  

“Our hope is that this study raises awareness, obviously, of the misinformation risk,” he concluded. “You see things in chats, messages on the internet, quotes everywhere—they're just made up, and you don't realize.” 

🌘
Subscribe to 404 Media to get The Abstract, our newsletter about the most exciting and mind-boggling science news and studies of the week.
Read the whole story
mkalus
31 minutes ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Apple ‘Hide My Email’ Vulnerability Reveals Peoples’ Real Email Addresses

2 Shares
Apple ‘Hide My Email’ Vulnerability Reveals Peoples’ Real Email Addresses

A vulnerability in Apple’s “Hide My Email” tool lets almost anyone discover a person’s real email address that is supposed to be hidden by the feature, and Apple has failed to fix it for more than a year, according to a security researcher and 404 Media’s own tests.

404 Media is not revealing the exact details of the vulnerability because it can still be exploited as of Monday, when 404 Media verified the issue with one of our own hidden email addresses.

Read the whole story
mkalus
32 minutes ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Pluralistic: Gemini is better than search because Google enshittified search (29 Jun 2026)

1 Share


Today's links

  • Gemini is better than search because Google enshittified search: We're All Trying To Find The Guy Who Did This.
  • Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
  • Object permanence: Microsoft antitrust overturned; Scammer carves C64; RIP Jim Baen; GOP rep to constituent's child: "drop dead" (literally); CCTVs jacked for botnet; Olympic profitability lie; Human factors in health infosec; Exfiltration via computer fans; Congress's summer schedule: 9 working days; Antitrust is political antigrav; Ted Chiang's 72 Letters; Microsoft antitrust appeal; Vinge on privacy; Breaking open the web; Bernie on Brexit; "The Perdition Score"; Intuit v Child Tax Credit.
  • Upcoming appearances: London, Edinburgh, Sydney, Melbourne, Brighton, London, South Bend.
  • Recent appearances: Where I've been.
  • Latest books: You keep readin' em, I'll keep writin' 'em.
  • Upcoming books: Like I said, I'll keep writin' 'em.
  • Colophon: All the rest.



The original Google homepage, loaded in the first Netscape browser. It is viewed under a giant magnifying glass. Inside the magnifying glass, we see a killer robot (with the head of the Android droid), choking a man to death.

Gemini is better than search because Google enshittified search (permalink)

Write a critical AI book, and you become everyone's confessor for their AI sins. People in my life keep telling me about their guilty AI pleasures, in search of an explanation, absolution or condemnation:

https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374621568/thereversecentaursguidetolifeafterai/

Their most common confession: "I only ever use Google's AI-generated search summaries these days. I no longer click those blue links beneath it, not even to verify the summary." People know that the summaries are full of "hallucinations" (that is, "defects" or "errors") but the summaries are right often enough that many people have come to rely on them, to the exclusion of actual websites, made by actual people, on the actual internet.

Everyone knows this isn't good. The reason there's a web for Google's Gemini AI to summarize is that Google – the thrice-convicted monopoly search company with a 90% market share – directs people to websites, and when you visit a website, you generate revenue for the site, which pays for its maintenance. Most commonly, you generate an "ad impression," but you might also buy a subscription, or generate an "affiliate fee" by purchasing a recommended product.

When Google strips all this away by harvesting an "answer" and displaying it at the top of the page, the bargain between Google and the open web breaks down. Google is extracting 100% of the value from the websites it summarizes, and giving nothing back in return.

This is a marked reversal from Google's founding ethos. In the old days, Google measured its success by how little time you spent on its site. The ideal Google outcome was for you to visit its page (or even better, just a search-box in your browser), type a few words, and get "ten blue links" back, the top one of which was the correct link to locate the information or resource you were seeking. The point of Google was to serve as a conduit, a trusted intermediary that neutrally adjudicated the relevance of every web page for every web user from moment to moment.

Everyone dunks on Google for its high-minded motto, "Don't be evil," but over the years, the company's mission was far more important: "Organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful." That was the pole star that googlers followed for the first couple decades of the company's history…until, that is, the company saturated its market and its growth stalled out.

That was when Google started to panic over its plateauing search revenue, this being an inescapable consequence of 90%+ market-share. The ensuing power struggle pitted googlers who were committed to technical excellence against the company's most ardent enshittifiers, who pointed out that by making search worse, they could increase revenues. After all, if you need to search two or three times to get the answers to your questions, that means the company can show you two or three times as many ads:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/24/naming-names/#prabhakar-raghavan

Where once Google measured its success by how quickly it could send you away from its site and out into the open internet, today's Google is a sticky-trap full of ways to keep you inside its walled garden.

A decade ago, tech had three major approaches:

I. Google's: let you do anything you want, but spy on you while you do it;

II. Apple's: strictly control what you can do, but leave you alone to do it in private; and

III. Facebook's: control everything you do, spy on you from asshole to appetite.

Today, tech is undergoing a form of carcinization, in which every company is turning into a Facebook-crab: maximally surveillant and maximally controlling.

Apple has added surveillance to its walled garden:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/14/luxury-surveillance/#liar-liar

While Google has turned its free-range, internet-wide surveillance system into a walled garden that tries to keep you away from the open internet as much as possible.

Now, in Google's defense, the "open internet" kind of sucks these days. Any piece of useful information you seek out on the open internet is liable to be buried under half a dozen pop-ups, pop-unders, and dickovers:

https://daringfireball.net/2026/05/what_is_a_dickover

Even after you clear these away, the actual information you're seeking is further buried in word-salads that anticipated insipid AI prose by half a decade. Think of all those omelet recipes that appear beneath 2,500 words of cod-Proustian remembrances of "the first time I ate an egg."

The major advantage of AI search summaries is in shielding you from all this nonsense. But where did all that nonsense come from in the first place?

It turns out that this is largely Google's fault.

Google and Facebook monopolized the display advertising market, entering into an illegal, collusive arrangement to rig the bidding so that advertisers paid more and publishers received less:

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

The Google/Meta duopoly suck up 51% of display advertising revenue – more than triple the historic take for advertising intermediaries (buyers, brokers, agencies, etc). As ad revenues for web publishers cratered, the "ad load" on web pages went up. This set up a vicious cycle: increasing the number of ads decreases the number of readers, driving publishers to increase the ad-load even more to make up for the losses.

The major brake on this is ad-blocking. In a world with ad-blockers in it, publishers contemplating an increase in ad-load have to confront the possibility that they will induce ad-overload in their readers, who will install a blocker that stops them from seeing any ads:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/07/adblocking-how-about-nah

Google has been looking to kill ad-blocking for a decade, and now they're on the verge of making it happen in Chrome, the dominant web browser they use to reinforce their search monopoly:

https://protonprivacy.substack.com/p/google-is-finally-killing-ublock

Google long ago did away with ad-blocking on mobile devices (reverse engineering an app is a felony, which means an app is just a web-page skinned with the right kind of IP to make it a crime to protect your privacy while you use it). Part of Google's argument for killing ad-blocking for the web is that this puts the web on an even footing with apps – which is a very weird way to describe a race to the absolute bottom:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/06/12/compelled-speech/#quishing

To top it all off, this decade has seen Google make a series of changes to its search prioritization that favored low-value shovelware sites over carefully researched, reliable alternatives. Search for product reviews and you're apt to get a "site reputation abuse" result from a once-reliable outlet like Forbes filled with useless and even dangerous reviews, which are ranked far above independently maintained, rigorous competitors:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/03/keyword-swarming/#site-reputation-abuse

This has only gotten worse with AI search, which preferentially draws from spam sites to produce decontextualized, highly confident recommendations for substandard, overpriced junk, at the expense of recommendations for good products:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/07/15/inhuman-gigapede/#coprophagic-ai

It's not like Google doesn't have the ability to sort the good from the bad. Kagi.com is a $10/month paid search engine whose results are vastly superior to Google's. But Kagi doesn't have its own search index: instead, they rent access to Google's index, but apply their own (much smaller and less resourced) team's algorithm to rank the results for your queries. In other words, Google could deliver good search results, they just choose not to:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/04/teach-me-how-to-shruggie/#kagi

Gresham's Law holds that "bad money drives out good." It refers to a counterfeit coin crisis in Tudor England, where people preferentially spent counterfeit money in order to make it someone else's problem; meanwhile, everyone hoarded their good coins. Soon, virtually all the money in circulation was bogus.

By downranking quality material in favor of low-effort spam, Google set up a web-wide version of Gresham's Law, where bad webpages drive out good ones, and since so many of those webpages contain product recommendations, they're greshaming the world of real products, too, so the bad is driving out the good there, too.

This is the problem that Gemini search summaries solve: in its role as the web's most important gatekeeper, Google remade them as an ad-festooned cesspit of garbage text and cynical shovelware sites. Now Google proposes to wipe out the publishers whose content they stripmined by breaking the web's bargain: that search engines are symbiotic with publishers. Google has turned fully parasitic, sucking the last drops of juice out of the open web before discarding its husk.


Hey look at this (permalink)



A shelf of leatherbound history books with a gilt-stamped series title, 'The World's Famous Events.'

Object permanence (permalink)

#25yrsago Appeals court strikes down Microsoft antitrust ruling https://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/28/business/us-appeals-court-overturns-microsoft-antitrust-ruling.html

#25yrsago Ted Chiang's 72 Letters https://web.archive.org/web/20010720192340/http://www.tor.com/72ltrs.html

#25yrsago Concept handheld devices https://web.archive.org/web/20010620115437/https://www.infosync.no/en/news/n/419.asp

#25yrsago Analyzing Microsoft's successful antitrust appeal https://web.archive.org/web/20010703085656/https://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/06/28/appeals_reaction/index.html

#20yrsago Bengali science fiction of the 1880s https://www.lehigh.edu/~amsp/2006/05/early-bengali-science-fiction.html

#20yrsago Vernor Vinge on computers, freedom and privacy https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2006/jun/29/guardianweeklytechnologysection5

#20yrsago Scammer convinced to carve replica Commodore 64 https://www.419eater.com/html/john_boko.php

#20yrsago Jim Baen, sf publisher, has passed away https://web.archive.org/web/20060703024337/http://david-drake.com/baen.html

#15yrsago YouTube listens to fraudulent NyanCat takedown notice, drags heels on put-back from creator https://web.archive.org/web/20110628132607/http://www.prguitarman.com/index.php?id=369

#15yrsago Wyoming’s corporation mills manufacture privileged artificial “people” to order https://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/28/us-usa-shell-companies-idUSTRE75R20Z20110628/

#15yrsago Publishing in the Internet era: connecting audiences and works https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/jun/30/publishers-internet-changing-role?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

#15yrsago Why writers should have their own domains https://whatever.scalzi.com/2011/06/29/mastering-ones-own-domain-an-no-this-is-not-a-seinfeld-reference/

#15yrsago Copyright troll’s biggest fan commits terminal irony https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/06/righthaven-cheerleader-wanted-irony-police

#10yrsago Mississippi state rep tells distraught mom to buy kid’s lifesaving meds ‘with money she earns’ https://www.sunherald.com/news/local/counties/jackson-county/article86416087.html

#10yrsago Always-on CCTVs with no effective security harnessed into massive, unstoppable botnet https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/large-botnet-of-cctv-devices-knock-the-snot-out-of-jewelry-website/

#10yrsago Gun-waving cop who attacked black teenaged girl in her bathing suit faces no charges https://web.archive.org/web/20160624103549/http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2016/06/23/grand-jury-no-bills-former-mckinney-pool-party-cop/

#10yrsago The Olympics are profitable for every host city (that lies about the numbers) https://timharford.com/2016/06/how-do-you-make-the-olympics-pay-fudge-the-figures/

#10yrsago Healthcare workers prioritize helping people over information security (disaster ensues) https://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~sws/pubs/ksbk15-draft.pdf

#10yrsago Fansmitter: malware that exfiltrates data from airgapped computers by varying the sound of their fans https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GCHCVpndaM

#10yrsago Labour’s knives come out for Corbyn, but he’s guaranteed a spot on the ballot https://www.politico.eu/article/inside-account-of-labour-mps-attacks-on-jeremy-corbyn-shadow-cabinet-resignations-brexit/

#10yrsago Hope Larson’s “Compass South”: swashbuckling YA graphic novel https://memex.craphound.com/2016/06/28/hope-larsons-compass-south-swashbuckling-ya-graphic-novel/

#10yrsago How to Break Open the Web: a report on the first Decentralized Web Summit https://www.fastcompany.com/3061357/the-web-decentralized-distributed-open

#10yrsago Californians will get to vote on legal recreational weed https://web.archive.org/web/20160629130245/http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/voters-decide-legalize-recreational-marijuana-40206739

#10yrsago Bernie Sanders on Brexit: urgent lessons for the Democrats https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/opinion/campaign-stops/bernie-sanders-democrats-need-to-wake-up.html

#10yrsago Electoral fraud: Trump sends fundraiser emails to foreign politicians https://www.cnet.com/culture/trump-spams-foreign-politicians-with-fundraising-emails/#ftag=CAD590a51e

#10yrsago The Perdition Score: Sandman Slim vs the One Percent https://memex.craphound.com/2016/06/29/the-perdition-score-sandman-slim-vs-the-one-percent/

#5yrsago Intuit sabotages the Child Tax Credit https://pluralistic.net/2021/06/29/three-times-is-enemy-action/#ctc

#5yrsago SCOTUS to wrongfully accused terrorists: "drop dead" https://pluralistic.net/2021/06/29/three-times-is-enemy-action/#transunion

#5yrsago Lazy Congress only schedules 9 days' work this summer https://pluralistic.net/2021/06/28/dubious-quant-residue/#back-to-work-you

#1yrago Antitrust defies politics' law of gravity https://pluralistic.net/2025/06/28/mamdani/#trustbusting


Upcoming appearances (permalink)

A photo of me onstage, giving a speech, pounding the podium.



A screenshot of me at my desk, doing a livecast.

Recent appearances (permalink)



A grid of my books with Will Stahle covers..

Latest books (permalink)



A cardboard book box with the Macmillan logo.

Upcoming books (permalink)

  • "The Post-American Internet," a geopolitical sequel of sorts to Enshittification, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2027

  • "Unauthorized Bread": a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, April 20, 2027

  • "Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It" (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2027

  • "The Memex Method," Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2027



Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing: "The Post-American Internet," a sequel to "Enshittification," about the better world the rest of us get to have now that Trump has torched America. Fourth draft completed. Submitted to editor.

  • A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING

This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.


How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Bluesky (no ads, possible tracking and data-collection):

https://bsky.app/profile/doctorow.pluralistic.net

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

READ CAREFULLY: By reading this, you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies ("BOGUS AGREEMENTS") that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer.

ISSN: 3066-764X

Read the whole story
mkalus
2 days ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories