Blurblogs
Global
Popular
Log in
Michael's Shares
Resident of the world, traveling the road of life
67258 stories
·
21 followers

Pluralistic: The case for a Canadian wealth tax (23 Jun 2025) by Cory Doctorow
Tuesday June 24th, 2025 at 12:47 AM

Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
1 Share


Today's links


A gilt-roofed, gabled mansion with a hole chopped in its side. From within glitters a weath of gold coins. In the foreground stands a lumberjack, swinging an axe at the mansion. The background is a blown-up, half-toned late 20th century Canadian $50 bill.

The case for a Canadian wealth tax (permalink)

A major problem with letting billionaires decide how your country is run is that they will back whichever psycho promises the lowest taxes and least regulation, no matter how completely batshit and unfit that person is:

https://www.hamiltonnolan.com/p/nations-are-people

Billionaires have farcical, almost unimaginable resources. These let them take over whole political parties, even "left" parties, with the result that all real electoral options disappear. Voting for the other party gets you a different set of aesthetics, but the same existential threats to the human race and the planet:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/22/starmer-backs-us-strike-on-iran-and-calls-for-tehran-to-return-to-negotiations

After generations of increasingly oligarch-friendly policies and billionaire entryism into the Democratic Party, America may well be cooked, a total write-off for generations to come. The path to saving the world and our species arguably lies through strengthening other countries to resist American psychos and protect the planet from the consequences of their brainwormed leadership.

Writing for Jacobin, Alex Hemingway sets out a plan for imposing a wealth-tax on Canada's oligarchs, one that incorporates lessons from previous attempts at such a tax:

https://jacobin.com/2025/06/wealth-tax-canada-inequality-austerity/

Even on the left, the idea of a wealth-tax is controversial – not because leftists are sympathetic to billionaires, but because they are skeptical that a wealth tax can be carried out. It's a practical, not an ideological objection:

https://pileusmmt.libsyn.com/196-the-problem-with-wealth-taxes-with-steven-hail-part-1

After all, under capitalism, wealth always grows faster than the economy at large, meaning that over time, the rich will get steadily richer, and inequality will widen and widen:

https://memex.craphound.com/2014/06/24/thomas-pikettys-capital-in-the-21st-century/

Ideally, we would counter the trend of wealth piling up into dynastic fortunes with continuous redistribution and predistribution: taxing capital gains at the same rate (or a higher rate) than income, so that income from labor isn't treated worse than income from ownership; steeply graded progressive taxes, with top rates of 70-99%, high inheritance taxes, and so on. We had a system like that, from the end of WWII (when the rich were poorer than they'd been in centuries, with their influence in tatters) until the Reagan era (when the rich had rebuilt their fortunes and were able to seize the reins of power). In the 45 years since the rise of the new oligarchy, we've lived through accelerating wealth accumulation, and as the rich got richer, they used their wealth to dismantle any barrier to creating new aristocratic dynasties.

So here we are, trapped in the new oligarchy. It's too late to rely on income taxes, not if we're going to euthanize enough rentiers to free out politics from their toxic influence and save the human race any of several foreseeable mass-extinction events. Making the ultra-rich poor again is going to require new tactics.

In Canada, the 1% owns 29% of the country's wealth. The 87 richest families in Canada control as much wealth as the bottom 12 million Canadians combined. This is better than the US (where the 1% own 35% of the country), but not by much:

https://www.policyalternatives.ca/wp-content/uploads/attachments/Born%20to%20Win.pdf

Can we make a wealth tax work? Here's Hemingway's program for making it work in Canada:

  • Make it apply to all kinds of wealth equally. No carve-outs for real-estate, which makes it very easy to shift wealth among asset-classes to duck the tax;

  • Aim it at the super-rich alone. Avoid even the upper middle-class, who lack the liquid assets to pay the tax and could get wrecked if they have to liquidate their holdings at the same time as everyone else, which will depress asset prices;

  • Use third-party assessments of asset values. Don't take billionaires' word for how much their assets are worth! Canada's got an advantage here, thanks to the Canada Revenue Agency's requirement for financial institutions to report their account holders' income, including capital gains. Canada's also recently created "beneficial owner" registries that record the true owners of assets;

  • Use lifestyle audits: anyone caught engaging in tax-evasion will face severe penalties, as will the enablers at financial services firms that help them.

One frequent objection to high taxes is that it encourages capital flight – rich people hopping to another territory to avoid taxation. That's a reasonable fear, given how pants-wettingly terrified the rich are of paying tax. Hemingway points out that a wealth tax is different from an income tax – income taxes are levied on the outcome of productive activities, while wealth taxes target accumulated wealth. High income taxes can starve a country of the capital it needs for a productive economy, but that's not the case with wealth taxes.

Hemingway points to the OECD's Common Reporting Standard, through which more than 100 countries have agreed to share financial information, which will help Canada catch billionaires as they funnel their wealth offshore. Meanwhile, if the rich try to move with their money, we can hit them with an exit tax, like the 40% that Elizabeth Warren has proposed.

It's an article of faith that the rich will move offshore at the first hint of a wealth tax, but the research shows that rich people often have reasons to stay that trump their taxophobia. The economic effect of rich people Going Galt is pretty darned small:

https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/centres/cage/publications/workingpapers/2022/taxation_and_migration_by_the_super_rich/

The modern prophet of oligarchy and its origins is the French economist Thomas Piketty. In a recent Le Monde column, Piketty examines the failure of a French wealth tax proposal that would have shaved a modest 2% off the fortunes of the 1,800 French people with more than €100 million:

https://www.lemonde.fr/blog/piketty/2025/06/17/the-senate-beside-the-story/

The proposal passed the National Assembly, only to die in the Senate, an institution with a long history of pro-oligarchic activism (the Senate killed every French income tax passed by the Assembly from 1896-1914). The Assembly's wealth tax addressed the problem of tax exiles, levying the wealth tax for 5 years after an oligarch relocated. For Piketty, this didn't go far enough: he wants a pro-rated tax based on the number of years an oligarch spent in France in their lifetime: if you were educated and cared for at French expense from birth and went on to become a billionaire, then a modest share of your wealth would forever be owed to the country that made it possible. Piketty says that a wealth tax could be paid in shares instead of cash, with the stock going into a trust for workers, who would get board seats as well.

He points out that decarbonization is going to require large sacrifices from all of us, but that these will be impossible to demand with a straight face so long as the super-rich are paying taxes that are trivial relative to their assets and income.

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)

#20yrsago Snapple floods Manhattan with 17.5 tons of frozen kiwi-strawberry slurry https://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/006460.html#006460

#20yrsago Beloved Toronto singing cowboy/mayoral candidate Ben Kerr, RIP https://www.blogto.com/city/2005/06/ben_kerr_a_toronto_legend_passes_away/

#20yrsago Heinlein’s house https://web.archive.org/web/20050625235954/http://www.heinleinsociety.org/rah/history/bonnydoon1.html

#20yrsago Banned Nepali radio station transmits via megaphone https://reliefweb.int/report/nepal/banned-air-nepal-news-radio-hits-streets

#20yrsago Queen Liz: Sony remotes are too hard to use https://web.archive.org/web/20050815080728/http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?email&NewsID=11914

#15yrsago ASCAP raising money to fight Free Culture https://memex.craphound.com/2010/06/23/ascap-raising-money-to-fight-free-culture/

#15yrsago Original Pac-Man sketches https://www.control-online.nl/2010/06/22/iwatani-toont-gamesgeschiedenis-in-meest-pure-vorm/

#15yrsago Viacom v Internet: round one to Internet https://memex.craphound.com/2010/06/23/viacom-v-internet-round-one-to-internet/

#15yrsago A Canadian author’s perspective on “radical extremism” and copyright https://memex.craphound.com/2010/06/23/a-canadian-authors-perspective-on-radical-extremism-and-copyright/

#15yrsago Gate guarded McMansion suburb in Walt Disney Worldhttps://insidethemagic.net/2010/06/disney-unveils-golden-oak-luxury-homes-offering-a-chance-to-live-in-the-walt-disney-world-resort/

#15yrsago Canadian Heritage Minister declares war on copyright reformers https://web.archive.org/web/20100626073040/http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5138/125/

#15yrsago Bruce Sterling’s Shareable.net story about astroturfer gulag https://www.shareable.net/the-exterminators-want-ad/

#15yrsago Corruption: FCC’s closed-door meetings on open Internet https://web.archive.org/web/20100626222659/http://blog.broadband.gov/?entryId=518087

#15yrsago Canadian Heritage Minister smears DMCA opponents as “radical extremists” https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2010/06/moore-and-radical-extremists/

#15yrsago US IP Czar’s report sells out the American public to Big Content https://memex.craphound.com/2010/06/22/us-ip-czars-report-sells-out-the-american-public-to-big-content/

#15yrsago I Love Paree: new sf story podcast https://craphound.com/news/2010/06/22/i-love-paree-part-1/

#10yrsago Australia’s own Immortan Joe turns off the water, I mean, Internet https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/06/australia-passes-controversial-anti-piracy-web-censorship-law/

#10yrsago GCHQ psychological operations squad targeted Britons for manipulation https://theintercept.com/2015/06/22/controversial-gchq-unit-domestic-law-enforcement-propaganda/

#10yrsago GCHQ hacking squad worried about getting sued for copyright violation https://theintercept.com/2015/06/22/gchq-reverse-engineering-warrants/

#10yrsago The Girl With the Parrot on Her Head https://memex.craphound.com/2015/06/22/the-girl-with-the-parrot-on-her-head/

#10yrsago FDA & FTC mull homeopathy’s future https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/homeopathic-industry-and-its-acolytes-make-poor-showing-before-fda/

#10yrsago Tie your shoes the Ukrainian way http://shnurovka.com/en/step-by-step-instructions-english/

#10yrsago Outstanding paper on the impact of ebook DRM on readers, writers, publishers and distributors https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/Bittar_Ana_Carolina.pdf

#10yrsago You’ll falafel about this horrifying new pita-sized crypto-key-sniffing hack https://www.wired.com/2015/06/radio-bug-can-steal-laptop-crypto-keys-fits-inside-pita/

#5yrsago Against AI phrenology https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/23/cryptocidal-maniacs/#phrenology

#5yrsago Privacy in tracing tokens https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/23/cryptocidal-maniacs/#trace-together

#5yrsago Congress wants to read all your DMs https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/23/cryptocidal-maniacs/#crypto-wars

#5yrsago Blueleaks https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/23/cryptocidal-maniacs/#ddosecrets

#5yrsago Surveillance electoralism https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/23/cryptocidal-maniacs/#aaronsw

#5yrsago The real cyberwar is Goliath, slaughtering an army of Davidshttps://pluralistic.net/2020/06/22/jobs-guarantee/#selection-bias

#5yrsago The Case for a Job Guarantee https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/22/jobs-guarantee/#job-guarantee

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)

  • Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, October 7 2025
    https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374619329/enshittification/

  • Unauthorized Bread: a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, 2026

  • Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026

  • The Memex Method, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2026


Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing:

  • 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

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

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

https://twitter.com/doctorow

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
6 hours ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Pluralistic: Your Meta AI prompts are in a live, public feed (19 Jun 2025) by Cory Doctorow
Tuesday June 24th, 2025 at 12:47 AM

Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
1 Share


Today's links


A moody room with Shining-esque broadloom. In fhe foreground stands a giant figure the with the head of Mark Zuckerberg's metaverse avatar; its eyes have been replaced with the glaring red eyes of HAL 9000 from Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey' and has the logo for Meta AI on its lapel; it peers though a magnifying glass at a tiny figure standing on its vast palm. The tiny figure has a leg caught in a leg-hold trap and wears an expression of eye-rolling horror. In the background, gathered around a sofa and an armchair, is a ranked line of grinning businessmen, who are blue and flickering in the manner of a hologram display in Star Wars.

Your Meta AI prompts are in a live, public feed (permalink)

Back in 2006, AOL tried something incredibly bold and even more incredibly stupid: they dumped a data-set of 20,000,000 "anonymized" search queries from 650,000 users (yes, AOL had a search engine – there used to be lots of search engines!):

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

The AOL dump was a catastrophe. In an eyeblink, many of the users in the dataset were de-anonymized. The dump revealed personal, intimate and compromising facts about the lives of AOL search users. The AOL dump is notable for many reasons, not least because it jumpstarted the academic and technical discourse about the limits of "de-identifying" datasets by stripping out personally identifying information prior to releasing them for use by business partners, researchers, or the general public.

It turns out that de-identification is fucking hard. Just a couple of datapoints associated with an "anonymous" identifier can be sufficient to de-anonymize the user in question:

https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1508081113

But firms stubbornly refuse to learn this lesson. They would love it if they could "safely" sell the data they suck up from our everyday activities, so they declare that they can safely do so, and sell giant data-sets, and then bam, the next thing you know, a federal judge's porn-browsing habits are published for all the world to see:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/01/data-browsing-habits-brokers

Indeed, it appears that there may be no way to truly de-identify a data-set:

https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/understanding-the-maths-is-crucial-for-protecting-privacy

Which is a serious bummer, given the potential insights to be gleaned from, say, population-scale health records:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/23/health/data-privacy-protection.html

It's clear that de-identification is not fit for purpose when it comes to these data-sets:

https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~arvindn/publications/precautionary.pdf

But that doesn't mean there's no safe way to data-mine large data-sets. "Trusted research environments" (TREs) can allow researchers to run queries against multiple sensitive databases without ever seeing a copy of the data, and good procedural vetting as to the research questions processed by TREs can protect the privacy of the people in the data:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/10/01/the-palantir-will-see-you-now/#public-private-partnership

But companies are perennially willing to trade your privacy for a glitzy new product launch. Amazingly, the people who run these companies and design their products seem to have no clue as to how their users use those products. Take Strava, a fitness app that dumped maps of where its users went for runs and revealed a bunch of secret military bases:

https://gizmodo.com/fitness-apps-anonymized-data-dump-accidentally-reveals-1822506098

Or Venmo, which, by default, let anyone see what payments you've sent and received (researchers have a field day just filtering the Venmo firehose for emojis associated with drug buys like "pills" and "little trees"):

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/09/technology/personaltech/venmo-privacy-oversharing.html

Then there was the time that Etsy decided that it would publish a feed of everything you bought, never once considering that maybe the users buying gigantic handmade dildos shaped like lovecraftian tentacles might not want to advertise their purchase history:

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2011/03/etsy-users-irked-after-buyers-purchases-exposed-to-the-world/

But the most persistent, egregious and consequential sinner here is Facebook (naturally). In 2007, Facebook opted its 20,000,000 users into a new system called "Beacon" that published a public feed of every page you looked at on sites that partnered with Facebook:

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

Facebook didn't just publish this – they also lied about it. Then they admitted it and promised to stop, but that was also a lie. They ended up paying $9.5m to settle a lawsuit brought by some of their users, and created a "Digital Trust Foundation" which they funded with another $6.5m. Mark Zuckerberg published a solemn apology and promised that he'd learned his lesson.

Apparently, Zuck is a slow learner.

Depending on which "submit" button you click, Meta's AI chatbot publishes a feed of all the prompts you feed it:

https://techcrunch.com/2025/06/12/the-meta-ai-app-is-a-privacy-disaster/

Users are clearly hitting this button without understanding that this means that their intimate, compromising queries are being published in a public feed. Techcrunch's Amanda Silberling trawled the feed and found:

  • "An audio recording of a man in a Southern accent asking, 'Hey, Meta, why do some farts stink more than other farts?'"

  • "people ask[ing] for help with tax evasion"

  • "[whether family members would be arrested for their proximity to white-collar crimes"

  • "how to write a character reference letter for an employee facing legal troubles, with that person’s first and last name included."

While the security researcher Rachel Tobac found "people’s home addresses and sensitive court details, among other private information":

https://twitter.com/racheltobac/status/1933006223109959820

There's no warning about the privacy settings for your AI prompts, and if you use Meta's AI to log in to Meta services like Instagram, it publishes your Instagram search queries as well, including "big booty women."

As Silberling writes, the only saving grace here is that almost no one is using Meta's AI app. The company has only racked up a paltry 6.5m downloads, across its ~3 billion users, after spending tens of billions of dollars developing the app and its underlying technology.

The AI bubble is overdue for a pop:

https://www.wheresyoured.at/measures/

When it does, it will leave behind some kind of residue – cheaper, spin-out, standalone models that will perform many useful functions:

https://locusmag.com/2023/12/commentary-cory-doctorow-what-kind-of-bubble-is-ai/

Those standalone models were released as toys by the companies pumping tens of billions into the unsustainable "foundation models," who bet that – despite the worst unit economics of any technology in living memory – these tools would someday become economically viable, capturing a winner-take-all market with trillions of upside. That bet remains a longshot, but the littler "toy" models are beating everyone's expectations by wide margins, with no end in sight:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00259-0

I can easily believe that one enduring use-case for chatbots is as a kind of enhanced diary-cum-therapist. Journalling is a well-regarded therapeutic tactic:

https://www.charliehealth.com/post/cbt-journaling

And the invention of chatbots was instantly followed by ardent fans who found that the benefits of writing out their thoughts were magnified by even primitive responses:

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

Which shouldn't surprise us. After all, divination tools, from the I Ching to tarot to Brian Eno and Peter Schmidt's Oblique Strategies deck have been with us for thousands of years: even random responses can make us better thinkers:

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

I make daily, extensive use of my own weird form of random divination:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/07/31/divination/

The use of chatbots as therapists is not without its risks. Chatbots can – and do – lead vulnerable people into extensive, dangerous, delusional, life-destroying ratholes:

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/ai-spiritual-delusions-destroying-human-relationships-1235330175/

But that's a (disturbing and tragic) minority. A journal that responds to your thoughts with bland, probing prompts would doubtless help many people with their own private reflections. The keyword here, though, is private. Zuckerberg's insatiable, all-annihilating drive to expose our private activities as an attention-harvesting spectacle is poisoning the well, and he's far from alone. The entire AI chatbot sector is so surveillance-crazed that anyone who uses an AI chatbot as a therapist needs their head examined:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/04/01/doctor-robo-blabbermouth/#fool-me-once-etc-etc

AI bosses are the latest and worst offenders in a long and bloody lineage of privacy-hating tech bros. No one should ever, ever, ever trust them with any private or sensitive information. Take Sam Altman, a man whose products routinely barf up the most ghastly privacy invasions imaginable, a completely foreseeable consequence of his totally indiscriminate scraping for training data.

Altman has proposed that conversations with chatbots should be protected with a new kind of "privilege" akin to attorney-client privilege and related forms, such as doctor-patient and confessor-penitent privilege:

https://venturebeat.com/ai/sam-altman-calls-for-ai-privilege-as-openai-clarifies-court-order-to-retain-temporary-and-deleted-chatgpt-sessions/

I'm all for adding new privacy protections for the things we key or speak into information-retrieval services of all types. But Altman is (deliberately) omitting a key aspect of all forms of privilege: they immediately vanish the instant a third party is brought into the conversation. The things you tell your lawyer are privileged, unless you discuss them with anyone else, in which case, the privilege disappears.

And of course, all of Altman's products harvest all of our information. Altman is the untrusted third party in every conversation everyone has with one of his chatbots. He is the eternal Carol, forever eavesdropping on Alice and Bob:

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

Altman isn't proposing that chatbots acquire a privilege, in other words – he's proposing that he should acquire this privilege. That he (and he alone) should be able to mine your queries for new training data and other surveillance bounties.

This is like when Zuckerberg directed his lawyers to destroy NYU's "Ad Observer" project, which scraped Facebook to track the spread of paid political misinformation. Zuckerberg denied that this was being done to evade accountability, insisting (with a miraculously straight face) that it was in service to protecting Facebook users' (nonexistent) privacy:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/08/05/comprehensive-sex-ed/#quis-custodiet-ipsos-zuck

We get it, Sam and Zuck – you love privacy.

We just wish you'd share.

(Image: Japanexperterna.se, CC BY-SA 2.0, modified)

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)

#10yrsago What’s in the Pope’s barn-storming environmental message? https://www.wired.com/2015/06/popes-memo-climate-change-mind-blower/

#5yrsago Microsoft criticizes Apple's monopolism https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/19/art-of-the-deal/#honi-soit-qui-mal-y-pense

#5yrsago Austerity in disrepute https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/19/art-of-the-deal/#breadlines-r-us

#5yrsago Avia, c'est mort https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/19/art-of-the-deal/#avia

#5yrsago Trump's covid "test-tubes" are contaminated miniature soda bottles https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/19/art-of-the-deal/#art-of-the-deal

#5yrsago Trump wants to dismantle the OTF https://pluralistic.net/2020/06/19/art-of-the-deal/#save-otf

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)

  • Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, October 7 2025
    https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374619329/enshittification/

  • Unauthorized Bread: a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, 2026

  • Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026

  • The Memex Method, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2026


Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing:

  • Enshittification: a nonfiction book about platform decay for Farrar, Straus, Giroux. Status: second pass edit underway (readaloud)

  • 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

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

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

https://twitter.com/doctorow

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
6 hours ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal - Experience by Zach Weinersmith
Tuesday June 24th, 2025 at 12:46 AM

Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal
1 Share


Click here to go see the bonus panel!

Hovertext:
It'd be worth having this just for photos of the shamefaced users emerging from the experience machine door.


Today's News:
Read the whole story
mkalus
6 hours ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Meta's AI Model 'Memorized' Huge Chunks of Books, Including 'Harry Potter' and '1984' by Rosie Thomas
Monday June 23rd, 2025 at 4:57 PM

404 Media
1 Comment
Meta's AI Model 'Memorized' Huge Chunks of Books, Including 'Harry Potter' and '1984'

A new paper from researchers at Stanford, Cornell, and West Virginia University seems to show that one version of Meta’s flagship AI model, Llama 3.1, has memorized almost the whole of the first Harry Potter book. This finding could have far-reaching copyright implications for the AI industry and impact authors and creatives who are already part of class-action lawsuits against Meta. 

Researchers tested a bunch of different widely-available free large language models to see what percentage of 56 different books they could reproduce. The researchers fed the models hundreds of short text snippets from those books and measured how well it could recite the next lines. The titles were a random sampling of popular, lesser-known, and public domain works drawn from the now-defunct and controversial Books3 dataset that Meta used to train its models, as well as books by plaintiffs in the recent, and ongoing, Kadrey vs Meta class-action lawsuit. 

According to Mark A. Lemley, one of the study authors, this finding might have some interesting implications. AI companies argue that their models are generative—as in, they make new stuff, rather than just being fancy search engines. On the other hand, authors and news outlets are suing on the basis that AI is just remixing existing material, including copyrighted content. “I think what we show in the paper is that neither of those characterizations is accurate,” says Lemley.

The paper shows that the capacity of Meta’s popular Llama 3.1 70B to recite passages from The Sorcerer’s Stone and 1984—among other books—is way higher than could happen by chance. This could indicate that LLMs are not just trained using books, but might actually be storing entire copies of the books themselves. That might mean that under copyright law that the model is less “inspired by” and more “a bootleg copy of” certain texts. 

It’s hard to prove that a model has “memorized” something, because it’s hard to see inside. But LLMs are trained using the mathematical relationships between little chunks of data called ‘tokens,’ like words or punctuation. Tokens all have varying probabilities of following each other or getting strung together in a specific order.

The researchers were able to extract sections of various books by repeatedly prompting the models with selected lines. They split each book into 100-token overlapping strings, then presented the model with the first 50-token half and measured how well it could produce the second. This might take a few tries, but ultimately the study was able to reproduce 91 percent of The Sorcerer’s Stone with this method. 

“There’s no way, it’s really improbable, that it can get the next 50 words right if it hadn’t memorized it,” James Grimmelmann, Tessler Family Professor of Digital and Information Law at Cornell, who has worked to define “memorization” in this space, told 404 Media. 

OpenAI has called memorization “a rare failure of the learning process,” and says that it sometimes happens when the topic in question appears many times in training data. It also says that intentionally getting their LLMs to spit out memorized data “is not an appropriate use of our technology and is against our terms of use.”

The study’s authors say in their paper that if the model is storing a book in its memory, the model itself could be considered to literally “be” a copy of the book. If that’s the case, then distributing the LLM at all might be legally equivalent to bootlegging a DVD. And this could mean that a court could order the destruction of the model itself, in the same way they’ve ordered the destruction of a cache of boxsets of pirated films. This has never happened in the AI space, and might not be possible, given how widespread these models are. Meta doesn’t release usage statistics of its different LLMs, but 3.1 70B is one of its most popular. The Stanford paper estimates that the Llama 3.1 70B model has been downloaded a million times since its release, so, technically, Meta could have accidentally distributed a million pirate versions of The Sorcerer’s Stone. 

The paper found that different Llama models had memorized widely varying amounts of the tested books. “There are lots of books for which it has essentially nothing,” said Lerney. Some models were amazing at regurgitating, and others weren’t, meaning that it was more likely that the specific choices made in training the 3.1 70B version had led to memorization, the researchers said. That could be as simple as the choice not to remove duplicated training data, or the fact that Harry Potter and 1984 are pretty popular books online. For comparison, the researchers found that the Game of Thrones books were highly memorized, but Twilight books weren’t memorized at all.

Grimmelman said he believes their findings might also be good news overall for those seeking to regulate AI companies. If courts rule against allowing extensive memorization, “then you could give better legal treatment to companies that have mitigated or prevented it than the companies that didn't,” he said. “You could just say, if you memorize more than this much of a book, we'll consider that infringement. It's up to you to figure out how to make sure your models don't memorize more than that.”



Read the whole story
mkalus
13 hours ago
reply
Burn, baby burn.
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Iyo vs. Io — OpenAI and Jony Ive get sued by David Gerard
Monday June 23rd, 2025 at 3:57 PM

Pivot to AI
1 Share

In May, legendary Apple designer Jony Ive hooked up with OpenAI to announce an unspecified gadget. [WSJ, archive]

To promote this complete vaporware, OpenAI released a video of Sam Altman and Ive being matey. OpenAI bought Ive’s startup Io Products in an all-stock deal — swapping imaginary book values and certainly not actual money. [Twitter, video]

That video was suddenly taken down over the weekend — as was all marketing material mentioning Io Products. TechCrunch]

Iyo Audio is suing OpenAI, Io Products, Altman, and Ive for trademark violation and unfair competition. Judge Trina L. Thompson granted a temporary restraining order on Friday. [Complaint, PDF; order, PDF; case docket]

Iyo is making the Iyo One, earbuds with a chatbot — a personal gadget in the manner of the Rabbit R1 or the unlamented Humane Ai Pin.

Iyo thinks Altman and Ive have been stringing them along to steal their tech.

Three years ago, in 2022, Iyo had pitched to both Altman and Ive for investment and collaboration:

Based on these meetings defendants stated to Iyo that they thought Iyo One had promise, and outright asked Iyo to share with them its intellectual property embodied in the Iyo One.

Just in March 2025, Iyo and OpenAI talked about OpenAI buying Iyo.

Iyo says it’s been unable to raise investment since OpenAI and Ive’s announcement. Jason Rugolo from Iyo even says that Altman threatened to sue Iyo for violating Io Products’ trademark! [declaration, PDF]

OpenAI’s deal with Ive has yet to actually be signed. Let’s see what happens.

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

'A Black Hole of Energy Use': Meta's Massive AI Data Center Is Stressing Out a Louisiana Community by Roshan Abraham
Monday June 23rd, 2025 at 1:03 PM

404 Media
1 Share
'A Black Hole of Energy Use': Meta's Massive AI Data Center Is Stressing Out a Louisiana Community

A massive data center for Meta’s AI will likely lead to rate hikes for Louisiana customers, but Meta wants to keep the details under wraps.

Holly Ridge is a rural community bisected by US Highway 80, gridded with farmland, with a big creek—it is literally named Big Creek—running through it. It is home to rice and grain mills and an elementary school and a few houses. Soon, it will also be home to Meta’s massive, 4 million square foot AI data center hosting thousands of perpetually humming servers that require billions of watts of energy to power. And that energy-guzzling infrastructure will be partially paid for by Louisiana residents. 

The plan is part of what Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said would be “a defining year for AI.” On Threads, Zuckerberg boasted that his company was “building a 2GW+ datacenter that is so large it would cover a significant part of Manhattan,” posting a map of Manhattan along with the data center overlaid. Zuckerberg went on to say that over the coming years, AI “will drive our core products and business, unlock historic innovation, and extend American technology leadership. Let's go build! 💪”

Mark Zuckerberg (@zuck) on Threads
This will be a defining year for AI. In 2025, I expect Meta AI will be the leading assistant serving more than 1 billion people, Llama 4 will become the leading state of the art model, and we’ll build an AI engineer that will start contributing increasing amounts of code to our R&D efforts. To power this, Meta is building a 2GW+ datacenter that is so large it would cover a significant part of Manhattan.
'A Black Hole of Energy Use': Meta's Massive AI Data Center Is Stressing Out a Louisiana CommunityThreads
'A Black Hole of Energy Use': Meta's Massive AI Data Center Is Stressing Out a Louisiana Community

What Zuckerberg did not mention is that "Let's go build" refers  not only to the massive data center but also three new Meta-subsidized, gas power plants and a transmission line to fuel it serviced by Entergy Louisiana, the region’s energy monopoly. 

Key details about Meta’s investments with the data center remain vague, and Meta’s contracts with Entergy are largely cloaked from public scrutiny. But what is known is the $10 billion data center has been positioned as an enormous economic boon for the area—one that politicians bent over backward to facilitate—and Meta said it will invest $200 million into “local roads and water infrastructure.” 

A January report from NOLA.com said that the the state had rewritten zoning laws, promised to change a law so that it no longer had to put state property up for public bidding, and rewrote what was supposed to be a tax incentive for broadband internet meant to bridge the digital divide so that it was only an incentive for data centers, all with the goal of luring in Meta.

But Entergy Louisiana’s residential customers, who live in one of the poorest regions of the state, will see their utility bills increase to pay for Meta’s energy infrastructure, according to Entergy’s application. Entergy estimates that amount will be small and will only cover a transmission line, but advocates for energy affordability say the costs could balloon depending on whether Meta agrees to finish paying for its three gas plants 15 years from now. The short-term rate increases will be debated in a public hearing before state regulators that has not yet been scheduled.

The Alliance for Affordable Energy called it a “black hole of energy use,” and said “to give perspective on how much electricity the Meta project will use: Meta’s energy needs are roughly 2.3x the power needs of Orleans Parish … it’s like building the power impact of a large city overnight in the middle of nowhere.”

404 Media reached out to Entergy for comment but did not receive a response.

By 2030, Entergy’s electricity prices are projected to increase 90 percent from where they were in 2018, although the company attributes much of that to damage to infrastructure from hurricanes. The state already has a high energy cost burden in part because of a storm damage to infrastructure, and balmy heat made worse by climate change that drives air conditioner use. The state's homes largely are not energy efficient, with many porous older buildings that don’t retain heat in the winter or remain cool in the summer.

“You don't just have high utility bills, you also have high repair costs, you have high insurance premiums, and it all contributes to housing insecurity,” said Andreanecia Morris, a member of Housing Louisiana, which is opposed to Entergy’s gas plant application. She believes Meta’s data center will make it worse. And Louisiana residents have reasons to distrust Entergy when it comes to passing off costs of new infrastructure: in 2018, the company’s New Orleans subsidiary was caught paying actors to testify on behalf of a new gas plant. “The fees for the gas plant have all been borne by the people of New Orleans,” Morris said.

In its application to build new gas plants and in public testimony, Entergy says the cost of Meta’s data center to customers will be minimal and has even suggested Meta’s presence will make their bills go down. But Meta’s commitments are temporary, many of Meta’s assurances are not binding, and crucial details about its deal with Entergy are shielded from public view, a structural issue with state energy regulators across the country. 

AI data centers are being approved at a breakneck pace across the country, particularly in poorer regions where they are pitched as economic development projects to boost property tax receipts, bring in jobs and where they’re offered sizable tax breaks. Data centers typically don’t hire many people, though, with most jobs in security and janitorial work, along with temporary construction work. And the costs to the utility’s other customers can remain hidden because of a lack of scrutiny and the limited power of state energy regulators. Many data centers—like the one Meta is building in Holly Ridge—are being powered by fossil fuels. This has led to respiratory illness and other health risks and emitting greenhouse gasses that fuel climate change. In Memphis, a massive data center built to launch a chatbot for Elon Musks’ AI company is powered by smog-spewing methane turbines, in a region that leads the state for asthma rates.   

“In terms of how big these new loads are, it's pretty astounding and kind of a new ball game,” said Paul Arbaje, an energy analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists, which is opposing Entergy’s proposal to build three new gas-powered plants in Louisiana to power Meta’s data center.

Entergy Louisiana submitted a request to the state’s regulatory body to approve the construction of the new gas-powered plants that would create 2.3 gigawatts of power and cost $3.2 billion in the 1440 acre Franklin Farms megasite in Holly Ridge, an unincorporated community of Richland Parish. It is the first big data center announced since Louisiana passed large tax breaks for data centers last summer. 

In its application to the public utility commission for gas plants, Entergy says that Meta has a planned investment of $5 billion in the region to build the gas plants in Richland Parish, Louisiana, where it claims in its application that the data center will employ 300-500 people with an average salary of $82,000 in what it points out is “a region of the state that has long struggled with a lack of economic development and high levels of poverty.”  Meta’s official projection is that it will employ more than 500 people once the data center is operational. Entergy plans for the gas plants to be online by December 2028. 

In testimony, Entergy officials refused to answer specific questions about job numbers, saying that the numbers are projections based on public statements from Meta. 

A spokesperson for Louisiana’s Economic Development told 404 Media in an email that Meta “is contractually obligated to employ at least 500 full-time employees in order to receive incentive benefits.”

When asked about jobs, Meta pointed to a public facing list of its data centers, many of which the company says employ more than 300 people. A spokesperson said that the projections for the Richland Parish site are based on the scale of the 4 million square foot data center. The spokesperson said the jobs will include “engineering and other technical positions to operational roles and our onsite culinary staff.”

When asked if its job commitments are binding, the spokesperson declined to answer, saying, “We worked closely with Richland Parish and Louisiana Economic Development on mutually beneficial agreements that will support long-term growth in the area.”

Others are not as convinced. “Show me a data center that has that level of employment,” says Logan Burke, executive director of the Alliance for Affordable Energy in Louisiana.

Entergy has argued the new power plants are necessary to satiate the energy need from Meta’s massive hyperscale data center, which will be Meta’s largest data center and potentially the largest data center in the United States. It amounts to a 25 percent increase in Entergy Louisiana’s current load, according to the Alliance for Affordable Energy.  

Entergy requested an exemption from a state law meant to ensure that it develops energy at the lowest cost by issuing a public request for proposals, claiming in its application and testimony that this would slow them down and cause them to lose their contracts with Meta.

Meta has agreed to subsidize the first 15 years of payments for construction of the gas plants, but the plant’s construction is being financed over 30 years. At the 15 year mark, its contract with Entergy ends. At that point, Meta may decide it doesn’t need three gas plants worth of energy because computing power has become more efficient or because its AI products are not profitable enough. Louisiana residents would be stuck with the remaining bill. 

“It's not that they're paying the cost, they're just paying the mortgage for the time that they're under contract,” explained Devi Glick, an electric utility analyst with Synapse Energy.

When asked about the costs for the gas plants, a Meta spokesperson said, “Meta works with our utility partners to ensure we pay for the full costs of the energy service to our data centers.” The spokesperson said that any rate increases will be reviewed by the Louisiana Public Service Commission. These applications, called rate cases, are typically submitted by energy companies based on a broad projection of new infrastructure projects and energy needs.

Meta has technically not finalized its agreement with Entergy but Glick believes the company has already invested enough in the endeavor that it is unlikely to pull out now. Other companies have been reconsidering their gamble on AI data centers: Microsoft reversed course on centers requiring a combined 2 gigawatts of energy in the U.S. and Europe. Meta swept in to take on some of the leases, according to Bloomberg.

And in the short-term, Entergy is asking residential customers to help pay for a new transmission line for the gas plants at a cost of more than $500 million, according to Entergy’s application to Louisiana’s public utility board. In its application, the energy giant said customers’ bills will only rise by $1.66 a month to offset the costs of the transmission lines. Meta, for its part, said it will pay up to $1 million a year into a fund for low-income customers. When asked about the costs of the new transmission line, a Meta spokesperson said,  “Like all other new customers joining the transmission system, one of the required transmission upgrades will provide significant benefits to the broader transmission system. This transmission upgrade is further in distance from the data center, so it was not wholly assigned to Meta.”

When Entergy was questioned in public testimony on whether the new transmission line would need to be built even without Meta’s massive data center, the company declined to answer, saying the question was hypothetical.

Some details of Meta’s contract with Entergy have been made available to groups legally intervening in Entergy’s application, meaning that they can submit testimony or request data from the company. These parties include the Alliance for Affordable Energy, the Sierra Club and the Union of Concerned Scientists.

But Meta—which will become Entergy’s largest customer by far and whose presence will impact the entire energy grid—is not required to answer questions or divulge any information to the energy board or any other parties. The Alliance for Affordable Energy and Union of Concerned Scientists attempted to make Meta a party to Entergy’s application—which would have required it to share information and submit to questioning—but a judge denied that motion on April 4.

The public utility commissions that approve energy infrastructure in most states are the main democratic lever to assure that data centers don’t negatively impact consumers. But they have no oversight over the tech companies running the data centers or the private companies that build the centers, leaving residential customers, consumer advocates and environmentalists in the dark. This is because they approve the power plants that fuel the data centers but do not have jurisdiction over the data centers themselves. 

“This is kind of a relic of the past where there might be some energy service agreement between some large customer and the utility company, but it wouldn't require a whole new energy facility,” Arbaje said.

A research paper by Ari Peskoe and Eliza Martin published in March looked at 50 regulatory cases involving data centers, and found that tech companies were pushing some of the costs onto utility customers through secret contracts with the utilities. The paper found that utilities were often parroting rhetoric from AI boosting politicians—including President Biden—to suggest that pushing through permitting for AI data center infrastructure is a matter of national importance.

“The implication is that there’s no time to act differently,” the authors wrote.

In written testimony sent to the public service commission, Entergy CEO Phillip May argued that the company had to bypass a legally required  request for proposals and requirement to find the cheapest energy sources for the sake of winning over Meta.

“If a prospective customer is choosing between two locations, and if that customer believes that location A can more quickly bring the facility online than location B, that customer is more likely to choose to build at location A,” he wrote.

Entergy also argues that building new gas plants will in fact lower electricity bills because Meta, as the largest customer for the gas plants, will pay a disproportionate share of energy costs. Naturally, some are skeptical that Entergy would overcharge what will be by far their largest customer to subsidize their residential customers. “They haven't shown any numbers to show how that's possible,” Burke says of this claim. Meta didn’t have a response to this specific claim when asked by 404 Media.

Some details, like how much energy Meta will really need, the details of its hiring in the area and its commitment to renewables are still cloaked in mystery. 

“We can't ask discovery. We can't depose. There's no way for us to understand the agreement between them without [Meta] being at the table,” Burke said.

It’s not just Entergy. Big energy companies in other states are also pushing out costly fossil fuel infrastructure to court data centers and pushing costs onto captive residents. In Kentucky, the energy company that serves the Louisville area is proposing 2 new gas plants for hypothetical data centers that have yet to be contracted by any tech company. The company, PPL Electric Utilities, is also planning to offload the cost of new energy supply onto its residential customers just to become more competitive for data centers. 

“It's one thing if rates go up so that customers can get increased reliability or better service, but customers shouldn't be on the hook to pay for new power plants to power data centers,” Cara Cooper, a coordinator with Kentuckians for Energy Democracy, which has intervened on an application for new gas plants there.

These rate increases don’t take into account the downstream effects on energy; as the supply of materials and fuel are inevitably usurped by large data center load, the cost of energy goes up to compensate, with everyday customers footing the bill, according to Glick with Synapse.

Glick says Entergy’s gas plants may not even be enough to satisfy the energy needs of Meta’s massive data center. In written testimony, Glick said that Entergy will have to either contract with a third party for more energy or build even more plants down the line to fuel Meta’s massive data center. 

To fill the gap, Entergy has not ruled out lengthening the life of some of its coal plants, which it had planned to close in the next few years. The company already pushed back the deactivation date of one of its coal plants from 2028 to 2030.

The increased demand for gas power for data centers has already created a widely-reported bottleneck for gas turbines, the majority of which are built by 3 companies. One of those companies, Siemens Energy, told Politico that turbines are “selling faster than they can increase manufacturing capacity,” which the company attributed to data centers.

Most of the organizations concerned about the situation in Louisiana view Meta’s massive data center as inevitable and are trying to soften its impact by getting Entergy to utilize more renewables and make more concrete economic development promises. 

Andreanecia Morris, with Housing Louisiana, believes the lack of transparency from public utility commissions is a bigger problem than just Meta. “Simply making Meta go away, isn't the point,” Morris says.  “The point has to be that the Public Service Commission is held accountable.”

Burke says Entergy owns less than 200 megawatts of renewable energy in Louisiana, a fraction of the fossil fuels it is proposing to fuel Meta’s center. Entergy was approved by Louisiana’s public utility commission to build out three gigawatts of solar energy last year , but has yet to build any of it.

“They're saying one thing, but they're really putting all of their energy into the other,” Burke says.

New gas plants are hugely troubling for the climate. But ironically, advocates for affordable energy are equally concerned that the plants will lie around disused - with Louisiana residents stuck with the financing for their construction and upkeep. Generative AI has yet to prove its profitability and the computing heavy strategy of American tech companies may prove unnecessary given less resource intensive alternatives coming out of China.

“There's such a real threat in such a nascent industry that what is being built is not what is going to be needed in the long run,” said Burke. “The challenge remains that residential rate payers  in the long run are being asked to finance the risk, and obviously that benefits the utilities, and it really benefits some of the most wealthy companies in the world, But it sure is risky for the folks who are living right next door.”

The Alliance for Affordable Energy expects the commission to make a decision on the plants this fall.

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