Resident of the world, traveling the road of life
69171 stories
·
21 followers

I Almost Lost My Mind in the Bridal Algorithm

1 Share
I Almost Lost My Mind in the Bridal Algorithm

I thought I would be a “cool” bride. I believed this because I never dreamed of my own wedding. When other girls daydreamed aloud about riding down the aisle on a pony, or gracefully officiated the union of a Princess Diana Beanie Baby and a Hot Wheels truck, I came up blank. Despite a constant stream of ‘90s media featuring transformative white dresses, there was nothing my imagination could conjure for it. I was busy scheduling meetings on my toy Palm Pilot. This was fine until 30 years later, when my now-husband asked me what I wanted for our own wedding, and I had nothing. After years of watching friends plan weddings, I only had one preference for the day: I didn’t want to feel stressed out. 

There are a few industries that prey on emotion particularly brazenly. The funeral industry is one. The wedding industry is another. I knew this going in. I thought I could defeat hundreds of years of socially ingrained pressure backed by a multi-billion dollar consumer machine. No problem. 

What I did not account for—shamefully, considering how much time I spend thinking and writing about technology in my professional life—was that in the more than three decades I’d spent building a resistance to deeply gendered expectations on my existence, that machine was perfecting the art of making me feel weird, broke, and ugly, and I wouldn’t recognize what was happening until I was deep in it. I’m talking about the wedding planning algorithm.

When Lillie and her fiance Morgan got engaged, Lillie told me she saw the difference in her social media feeds the moment she texted her friends the news. (They’re using first names only in this story for their privacy.) “Immediately, all of my social media was just flooded,” she told me in a phone call. “And I think at the beginning it was all just so shiny and new. I was like, ‘This is so awesome.’ So I did kind of consume a lot of bridal media pretty strongly out of the gate, because I didn't quite realize yet how much it was going to take over every single one of my social media apps.” 

We talk a lot here on 404 Media about “the algorithm.” Usually we're referring to either Instagram Reels or Tiktok. Part of the reason we discuss and dissect it so frequently is because if you're not careful, the algorithm—the spew of content these apps automatically show you based on your past viewing habits, data from other apps, or what the app thinks you’re interested in—becomes a mirror of your mind; this is dangerous territory considering it's easy to manipulate by people, brands, networks and corporations with perverse incentives. 

Some of this actually seems, and sometimes is, helpful at first. The design pattern of infinite scrolling relies on a variable reward system to be effective and truly endless. The next thing you see in your feed might be the exact nugget of wisdom, life hack, or listicle you needed to make your life better, or, in this case, your wedding flawless. But you’ll never know unless you keep scrolling through the next hundred useless or actively brainrotting videos. 

Like Lillie, the moment I got engaged and started Googling wedding dresses and venues was the moment my entire social media experience shifted into the Bride Algo. Every Reel and Tiktok, and I do mean every single post, contained something new I needed to change about myself:

  • “Everything I did to ‘lock in’ for my wedding & lose 34 lbs in 5 months without missing out on living life.”  
  • “If you spend $150k on a wedding and stay married for 40 years, that's only about $10 a day. Not bad for one of the best days of your life.” 
  • “What I will NOT be doing as a 2026 bride.” 
  • “Bridal Breakdown PSA to 2026 Brides.” 
  • “POV: You’re not fat, you’re just puffy.” 
  • “25 Things Guests Secretly Hate About Weddings”
  • “LEAVE THAT MAN AT THE ALTAR”

Journalist CT Jones calls the effect this content has on even the most level-headed people “wedding brain.” They recently wrote: “There’s this fog around my head that I can’t seem to shake when it comes to this event. My TikTok algorithm tells me every three swipes about the ‘biggest mistakes people make that ruin their special days.’”

Today's authority on weddings is Vogue, and in January 2020, Vogue correctly identified that social media was changing everything about how couples plan weddings. “Women of the 2010s became a lot more knowledgeable thanks to social media,” designer Danielle Frankel told the magazine. “They began seeing not just their friends getting married, but aspirational brides they follow on Instagram. There’s something kind of cool about researching through real people and their experiences, and the ability to share stories through a social platform.” In the six years that followed, this chipper assessment of there being “something kind of cool” about literal celebrity weddings does not age well. Being an influencer or content creator became one of the dwindling few ways for anyone in a creative field to make a living, a situation solidified by a tanked economy, a never-ending housing crisis, widespread unemployment, and AI gutting of a variety of fields. 

Fast forward to earlier this month, New York magazine published a story about the behind-the-scenes process that decides whose wedding makes it into Vogue, and what happens when they don’t. “One woman in the fashion industry had a breakdown after Vogue turned her down,” journalist Charlotte Klein wrote, adding that the jilted bride went to trauma rehab after. But the real crux of the issue—how multi-million dollar Vogue weddings, most of which are not celebrities but are parties thrown by total unknowns, are perceived, consumed, and rely on real, normal people’s attention—comes at the very end of the story, in a quote from a mysteriously anonymous fashion editor: “A wedding is a lot of work. It’s a full production and you’re spending months on it and you’re designing it—it’s a creative achievement in a way. If someone puts on a play or does an art installation, they get press and attention for it. And it’s like, Well, I did all this stuff for my wedding. Where is my round of applause?” 

That editor is talking about the Beckhams of the world, and the reality TV stars, and the old, old money Beltway normies. But they’re also talking to, and about, the rest of us. 

This is all so much insidious than it used to be. While the lifestyles of the rich and famous used to be reserved for magazines and Hollywood, we’re all swimming in the same algorithmic ocean now. “Today, Instagram encourages people to treat life itself like a wedding-like a production engineered to be witnessed and admired by an audience,” Jia Tolentino wrote in her 2019 book of essays Trick Mirror. “It has become common for people, especially women, to interact with themselves as if they were famous all the time. Under these circumstances, the vision of the bride as celebrity princess has hardened into something like a rule. Expectations of bridal beauty have collided with the wellness industry and produced a massive dark star of obligation.”

I know that I’m not alone in the Weddingtok and the Bridal Algo because people have started making videos mocking the content that’s stressing us all out. “If you feel calm, it’s probably because you’re forgetting something,” one planner says in a satirical video. The comments on these send-up videos reveal hundreds of women saying they’re stressed beyond belief, losing their minds, or otherwise crashing out. A comment on another such video: “Me locking in because I’m getting married next month and I fucking hate myself is literally my entire personality.” On another: “Pulling my hair out and screaming and can’t wait to disappear.”

Looking back, the moment I first heard the phrase “cake inspo board” feels like foreshadowing. I'd emailed a handful of bakeries and filled out a dozen inquiry forms at that point in the planning process. Because of competitiveness among vendors about rates and offerings (or possibly because some evil McKinsey for Weddings-type MBA entity decided this is a useful lead generation sales flow), every piece of information has to come directly from a vendor these days and is almost never listed on their websites publicly. It’s acquired by prospective clients, who blast 400 inquiries to their contact forms, some of them requiring multiple choice quizzes about the budget, timeline, “wedding day vibe” and personal social media handles. A few bakers got back to me with quotes for simple cakes. One asked for my mood board. For a cake? Like... flavors? I felt like I’d missed a step going down the stairs. I didn't have a vision board for the cake. I needed a vision board for the cake. 

Prior to planning a wedding, I hadn’t used Pinterest since 2008. When I started using it again after several vendors asked me for it, I felt a sugary thrill at pinning a disjointed collage of flowers, dresses, and other things I’d only describe as moon-landing-aspirational boards. Pinterest, meanwhile, is increasingly a minefield of AI slop, and has been for a while, with AI-generated makeup inspiration photos and dresses, which makes the process feel more confusing and unachievable. 

Alongside the thickly-iced and piped “vintage” triple-layer cakes is “thinspo” content, in the form of viral walking routines, the Gabby George arm workouts, and ads for ordering a GLP-1 online. “Thinspo” content is all over Pinterest and other social media platforms. 

“On Pinterest, every single photo is bones. Like, I can see clavicles. I can see sternums. I can see collarbones,” Lillie said. “Especially with the bridal outfits.” Once she starts feeling herself spending too much time looking through this kind of content, she takes a break.

"I'm like, okay, you know what? At least it's not just me, at least I'm not the only one who's like, ‘This is crazy.’”

I asked my friend Kelli Sullivan, whose objectively stunning wedding I attended in 2025, if she’d felt any of these anxieties while planning hers. “I feel like social media especially in recent years has gone so overboard with talking about and showcasing weddings, and particularly in a super influencer and curated style, that even subliminally influenced my own decisions when planning,” she said. 

“I don’t feel like social media gave me direct pressure when it came to planning and decision making, but it definitely influenced my wedding,” Kelli said. But it wasn’t all bad for her, necessarily. “I really loved immersing myself in that niche of social media and was inspired by Pinterest, Instagram and TikTok wedding ideas that helped shape many of my decisions and ideas I never would have really even considered as a possibility otherwise,” she said. “I also really appreciated insights from other brides and hearing their horror stories and similar struggles made me feel less alone when things felt heavy in planning.” 

Lillie said the same. “That is just the beauty of social media, sometimes, to just not feel alone. That has been really, really helpful for me,” she said. “But I'm like, okay, you know what? At least it's not just me, at least I'm not the only one who's like, ‘This is crazy.’”

Attending Kelli’s wedding, and all the other beautiful but vastly different weddings my friends have planned over the years, felt essential to understanding the many unspoken rules around ceremony, etiquette, and tradition, and all the ways these rules should be broken. But Lillie is the first of her friends to have a wedding. “I will kind of be the guinea pig for all of my friends, I guess, to look at my wedding and be like, ‘this is how Lillie did it,’” she said. “That’s also kind of been a lot of pressure. It's hard.” 

Adding to that pressure, she and Morgan are navigating these expectations as a lesbian couple in Idaho, and where they live skews heavily Mormon, conservative, and Christian. They use social media to vet vendors’ friendliness toward queer couples before contacting them, scanning Facebook and Instagram pages for signs of intolerance or hate. Lillie calls this being “on the lookout.” 

“Are these people that I want to interact with? How are they going to treat me? Am I going to be treated differently? I have to get some stuff altered for the boys suits, and we’d gotten in contact with a local seamstress up here, and I'm like, scrolling through her Facebook to see how she feels about me. And that's just a tiring thing to do. But it’s for my own safety. I don't want to go into these people's houses if it’s not going to be somewhere safe for me. That sometimes sounds really dramatic, but it's not. It just kind of casts a sort of shadow over everything,” Lillie explained. “This is supposed to be just such a joyous time of our life.”  

Almost all of the most viral wedding planning content on social media is aggressively heteronormative—a reflection of an industry struggling to keep up, and attitudes toward queer relationships and marriage in this country that are painfully, dangerously outdated. Lillie tells vendors that she and her fiancée are both women, and they still ask her who the groom is. They routinely ask her, “Who’s going to be the boy?” Meanwhile, Tiktok tells us a silk scarf basque waist dress and a sparkler exit is the real sin.

During my own planning, guests and vendors frequently asked me what our “colors” were. I didn't want to have specific colors, but the algorithm told me that even multicolor weddings are on-trend (derogatory), part of a “wildflower” fad of eclecticism. The algo also told me, over and over, that no matter what else I did, there was one combination to avoid lest I become a cringe dated chopped unc chud of a bride: chartreuse and burgundy. 

One of the planning tasks I truly enjoyed was picking out and arranging my own (minimal) florals. If the wedding you’re planning is at a venue that’s not all-inclusive—meaning, it’s on you to supply everything from the chairs and linens to the sound system, florals, food, desert, on and on—a lot of the process is emails and payment portals. I wanted to choose and assemble my own flowers for this reason: I needed to do something with my hands, finally, that brings me joy. 

My fiancé and I went to a wholesale flower market two days before our wedding and picked bunches. And ultimately, when I got to the flower market with no plan for my bouquet other than to choose what called to me, I ended up with a swaggy handful of hanging burgundy amaranthus stems and bright lime Bells-of-Ireland. Now everyone would know I got married sometime between 2025-2026.

This fear of being dated is a real joy killer, and a heavily-pushed narrative on the bridal algo right now. I love Basque waisted dresses and find them reliably flattering for my body shape, but #2026Bride influencers deemed them inexplicably cringe at some point in the last year, so my attraction to them soured, and finding a dress became a nightmare of rush shipping, returns and restocking fees. (While writing this story, InStyle published a piece that could only be made in that lab: a series of collage illustrations imagining Taylor Swift in wedding dresses, including one captioned “If you’re on #WeddingTok in 2026 like I am, you’ll know that the patron saint of basic bitches, Taylor Swift, is a basque-waist dress, burgundy-and-chartreuse color palette girl.”)

The fact that I can be swayed at all by what an internet person thinks, as a 36 year old with decades of being socially weird under my belt, disturbs me. I know that everything about what we do, wear, say, and choose is destined to be dated someday because we exist in a specific time. And yet, realizing when I got back with my bouquet and 15 pounds of freshly cut florals that I’d still somehow broken the year’s biggest, most made up mean-girl rule made me feel like an uncool little kid again.

In the car on the way back from the flower market, I bemoaned all of these things to my fiancé, who endured our apartment transforming into a shipping warehouse for weeks. He asked if it's a “comparison is the thief of joy” type-thing. It is that, but the comparison is no longer with some girl you went to high school with. Rather, it's an entire universe of options, budgets, opinions, and salespeople. In the scroll, it’s hard to tell the difference between a wedding real people got married at, and a photo spread that's meant to highlight a set of vendors or brands. Twenty years ago, an average couple might have had a wedding in their backyard or at the firehouse with catering, but surely they weren’t this stressed about tablescapes or cake inspo Pinterest boards.

"Most couples aren’t models, most budgets aren’t six figures, and most wedding days don’t unfold under perfect conditions."

People are getting wise to this. And there’s one type of wedding that I scrolled past over and over again before I realized they were all entirely staged: styled shoots. “Styled shoots are a common cheat. It’s kind of unethical imo. Once you know what to look out for, it’s pretty obvious,” Lana Dubkova, a documentary-style event and brand photographer, recently posted on X. Lana’s been a photographer for a decade but started doing weddings full-time in 2023. In a styled shoot, photographers, confectioners, designers, florists, venues, stylists, and the rest of the wedding vendor galaxy come together, often with professional models to serve as the bride, groom and guests, to display their wares in an editorial setting. These aren’t real weddings, but are meant to advertise their work to real couples and planners. And they are impacting real couples’ wedding day wants. 

Lana told me in an email that although her clients typically come to her for her own candid style, she often needs to “gently recalibrate” their expectations. “A common tension is that couples want both a highly immersive experience and an extensive set of posed, editorial images... without realizing those require time! A wedding day is finite, and every decision is a tradeoff: more time spent on photos often means less time spent with guests,” she said. “Most of these expectations come from social media, where timelines, budgets, and logistics are invisible. What’s presented as effortless is usually highly produced, and that disconnect can create unnecessary pressure.” 

She doesn’t believe styled shoots are all bad. They do serve a purpose for vendors’ portfolios. “There's a case to be made that maybe you're not getting hired for the type of weddings you would like to photograph and so you invest the money into a styled shoot to be able to display the style of wedding you want to be hired for in your portfolio,” she said. “Takes money to make money etc. But let's say you're a client looking to hire a photographer for a wedding. How would you feel if you found out the photographer you hired had ONLY styled shoots in their portfolio and had never actually shot a real wedding before? I imagine you'd want to know that ahead of time.” 

Styled shoots “become problematic when they’re presented without context,” she said. “A styled shoot is, by definition, a controlled environment: professional models, ideal lighting, high-end venues, curated florals, and unlimited time. Real weddings are the opposite: dynamic, time-constrained, and emotionally complex. Most couples aren’t models, most budgets aren’t six figures, and most wedding days don’t unfold under perfect conditions. A photographer’s ability to work quickly, adapt to changing light, and make people feel comfortable matters far more than their ability to create a perfect image in a controlled setting.” 

If you’re not planning a wedding or haven’t in the last three years or so, you might not be familiar with any of the content I’ve described so far. But this is the insidious nature of “the algorithm.” No one else is seeing yours. No one attending my wedding (except for others who were also recently married and are online) knew or cared that chartreuse and burgundy have been deemed cliche. They just liked the bouquet and thought it was pretty. And if they knew, they didn’t say it to my face, because talking about the internet in real life is absurd. 

“If social media didn’t exist or especially exist in the way it does with the curation (for weddings in particular) I probably would have done things way differently and maybe simpler,” Kelli told me. “Having a universe of options shown constantly online did give decision fatigue and also a pressure to have everything be aesthetic, especially with the knowledge that what we will share from the wedding will be perceived by others on social media.” 

“If I knew then what I know now, would I have planned a smaller wedding? Would I have probably eloped? Yes,” Lillie told me. “Do I still have, like, $8,000 in nonrefundable deposits down? Yes.” 

The things I remember about my friends’ weddings are not their tablescapes or whether they featured some forbidden color combination, and I didn’t make lists of things that made me secretly hate them. I remember, most of all, the moments around the weddings: meeting at a cobblestone street cafe the night before for warm Kronenbourgs, pouring mimosas on a moving bus in the morning, gluing an eyelash back on in a beach bathroom, fireworks shows both planned and unplanned, watching my newlywed friends sing and dance and feeling grateful to witness it all. The million tiny moments I remember from my own wedding are part of a different galaxy than all the shit my algorithm told me to worry about.

In the end, I didn’t make a cake vision board. I picked up cakes at the grocery store two days before the wedding, and in the heat of the evening, they melted into piles of buttercream goo before we could cut them fast enough. While we struggled to light candles, they toppled into heaps of pink and white icing and we just laughed.

Now that I’m several weeks beyond my own wedding, my algorithm has moved on, almost entirely free of bridal content of any kind. It has realized, or decided, that I have no need for it anymore, and must push me on my way to the next Arbitrary Human Milestone. It’s the exact same type of pseudo-authority influencers and ragebait disguised as wisdom, just for another industry the profit-making machine has been waiting eons to target me with: babies.

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

Pluralistic: A Pascal's Wager for AI Doomers (16 Apr 2026)

1 Comment and 2 Shares


Today's links



A killer 1940s robot zapping two large domes with eye-lasers; trapped under the domes are two children, taken from 1910s photos of child laborers; one, a little girl in a straw hat, is holding two heavy buckets. The other, a newsie with a shoulder bag, is picking his nose. The background is the collapsing pillars seen in Dore's engraving of The Death of Solomon.

A Pascal's Wager for AI Doomers (permalink)

Lest anyone accuse me of bargaining in bad faith here, let me start with this admission: I don't think AI is intelligent; nor do I think that the current (admittedly impressive) statistical techniques will lead to intelligence. I think worrying about what we'll do if AI becomes intelligent is at best a distraction and at worst a cynical marketing ploy:

https://locusmag.com/feature/cory-doctorow-full-employment/

Now, that said: among some of the "AI doomers," I recognize kindred spirits. I, too, worry about technologies controlled by corporations that have grown so powerful that they defy regulation. I worry about how those technologies are used against us, and about how the corporations that make them are fusing with authoritarian states to create a totalitarian nightmare. I worry that technology is used to spy on and immiserate workers.

I just don't think we need AI to do those things. I think we should already be worried about those things.

Last week, I had a version of this discussion in front of several hundred people at the Bronfman Lecture in Montreal, where I appeared with Astra Taylor and Yoshua Bengio (co-winner of the Turing Prize for his work creating the "deep learning" techniques powering today's AI surge), on a panel moderated by CBC Ideas host Nahlah Ayed:

https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/artificial-intelligence-the-ultimate-disrupter-tickets-1982706623885

It's safe to say that Bengio and I mostly disagree about AI. He's running an initiative called "Lawzero," whose goal is to create an international AI consortium that produces AI as a "digital public good" that is designed to be open, auditable, transparent and safe:

http://lawzero.org

Bengio said he'd started Lawzero because he was convinced that AI was going to get a lot more powerful, and, in the absence of some public-spirited version of AI, we would be subject to all kinds of manipulation and surveillance, and that the resulting chaos would present a civilizational risk.

Now, as I've stated (and as I said onstage) I am not worried about any of this. I am worried about AI, though. I'm worried a fast-talking AI salesman will convince your boss to fire you and replace you with an AI that can't do your job (the salesman will be pushing on an open door, since if there's one thing bosses hate, it's paying workers).

I'm worried that the seven companies that comprise 35% of the S&P 500 are headed for bankruptcy, as soon as someone makes them stop passing around the same $100b IOU while pretending it's in all their bank accounts at once. I'm worried that when that happens, the chatbots that badly do the jobs of the people who were fired because of the AI salesman will go away, and nothing and no one will do those jobs. I'm worried that the chaos caused by vaporizing a third of the stock market will lead to austerity and thence to fascism:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/13/always-great/#our-nhs

I worry that the workers who did those jobs will be scattered to the four winds, retrained or "discouraged" or retired, and that the priceless process knowledge they developed over generations will be wiped out and we will have to rebuild it amidst the economic and political chaos of the burst AI bubble:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/08/process-knowledge-vs-bosses/#wash-dishes-cut-wood

In short, I worry that AI is the asbestos we're shoveling into our civilization's walls, and our descendants will be digging it out for generations:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/01/06/1000x-liability/#graceful-failure-modes

But Bengio disagrees. He's very smart, and very accomplished, and he's very certain that AI is about to become "superhuman" and do horrible things to us if we don't get a handle on it. Several times at our events, he insisted that the existence of this possibility made it wildly irresponsible not to take measures to mitigate this risk.

Though I didn't say so at the time, this struck me as an AI-inflected version of Pascal's wager:

A rational person should adopt a lifestyle consistent with the existence of God and should strive to believe in God… if God does not exist, the believer incurs only finite losses, potentially sacrificing certain pleasures and luxuries; if God does exist, the believer stands to gain immeasurably, as represented for example by an eternity in Heaven in Abrahamic tradition, while simultaneously avoiding boundless losses associated with an eternity in Hell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager

Smarter people than me have been poking holes in Pascal's wager for more than 350 years. But when it comes to this modern Pascal's AI Wager, I have my own objection: how do you know when you've lost?

As of this moment, the human race has lit more than $1.4t on fire to immanentize this eschaton, and it remains stubbornly disimmanentized. How much more do we need to spend before we're certain that god isn't lurking in the word-guessing program? Sam Altman says it'll take another $2-3t – call it six months' worth of all US federal spending. If we do that and we still haven't met god, are we done? Can we call it a day?

Not according to Elon Musk. Musk says we need to deconstruct the solar system and build a Dyson sphere out of all the planets to completely encase the sun, so we can harvest every photon it emits to power our word-guessing programs:

https://www.pcmag.com/news/elons-next-big-swing-dyson-sphere-satellites-that-harness-the-suns-power

So let's say we do that and we still haven't met god – are we done? I don't see why we would be. After all, Musk's contention isn't that our sun emits one eschaton's worth of immanentizing particles. Musk just thinks that we need a lot of these sunbeams to coax god into our plane of existence. If one sun won't do it, perhaps two? Or two hundred? Or two thousand? Once we've committed the entire human species to this god-bothering project to the extent of putting two kilosuns into harness, wouldn't we be nuts to stop there? What if god is lurking in the two thousand and first sun? Making god out of algorithms is like spelling "banana" – easy to start, hard to stop.

But as Bengio and I got into it together on stage at the Montreal Centre, it occurred to me that maybe there was some common ground between us. After all, when someone starts talking about "humane technology" that respects our privacy and works for people rather than their bosses, my ears grow points. Throw in the phrase "international digital public goods" and you've got my undivided attention.

Because there's a sense in which Bengio and I are worried about exactly the same thing. I'm terrified that our planet has been colonized by artificial lifeforms that we constructed, but which have slipped our control. I'm terrified that these lifeforms corrupt our knowledge-creation process, making it impossible for us to know what's true and what isn't. I'm terrified that these lifeforms have conquered our apparatus of state – our legislatures, agencies and courts – and so that these public bodies work against the public and for our colonizing alien overlords.

The difference is, the artificial lifeforms that worry me aren't hypothetical – they're here today, amongst us, endangering the very survival of our species. These artificial lifeforms are called "limited liability corporations" and they are a concrete, imminent risk to the human race:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/15/artificial-lifeforms/#moral-consideration

What's more, challenging these artificial lifeforms will require us to build massive, "international, digital public goods": a post-American internet of free/open, auditable, transparent, enshittification-resistant platforms and firmware for every purpose and device currently in service:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/01/01/39c3/#the-new-coalition

And even after we've built that massive, international, digital public good, we'll still face the challenge of migrating all of our systems and loved ones out of the enshitternet of defective, spying, controlling American tech exports:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/01/30/zucksauce/#gandersauce

Every moment that we remain stuck in the enshitternet is a moment of existential risk. At the click of a mouse, Trump could order John Deere to switch off all the tractors in your country:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/05/08/about-those-kill-switched-ukrainian-tractors/

He doesn't need tanks to steal Greenland. He can just shut off Denmark's access to American platforms like Office365, iOS and Android and brick the whole damned country. It would be another Strait of Hormuz, but instead of oil and fertilizer, he'd control the flow of Lego, Ozempic and deliciously strong black licorice:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/01/29/post-american-canada/#ottawa

These aren't risks that could develop in the future. They're the risks we're confronted with today and frankly, they're fucking terrifying.

So here's my side-bet on Pascal's Wager. If you think we need to build "international digital public goods" to head off the future risk of a colonizing, remorseless, malevolent artificial lifeform, then let us agree that the prototype for that project is the "international digital public goods" we need right now to usher in the post-American internet and save ourselves from the colonizing, remorseless, malevolent artificial lifeforms that have already got their blood-funnels jammed down our throats.

Once we defeat those alien invaders, we may find that all the people who are trying to summon the evil god have lost the wherewithal to do so, and your crisis will have been averted. But if that's not the case and the evil god still looms on our horizon, then I will make it my business to help you mobilize the legions of skilled international digital public goods producers who are still flush from their victory over the limited liability corporation, and together, we will fight the evil god you swear is in our future.

I think that's a pretty solid offer.


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 Every pirate ebook on the internet https://web.archive.org/web/20010724030402/https://citizen513.cjb.net/

#20yrsago Retired generals diss Donald Rumsfeld https://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/007432.html#007432

#20yrsago How to break HDCP https://blog.citp.princeton.edu/2006/04/14/making-and-breaking-hdcp-handshakes/

#20yrsago How Sun’s “open DRM” dooms them and all they touch https://memex.craphound.com/2006/04/14/how-suns-open-drm-dooms-them-and-all-they-touch/

#20yrsago Benkler's "Wealth of Networks" http://www.congo-education.net/wealth-of-networks/

#15yrsago Scientific management’s unscientific grounding: the Management Myth https://web.archive.org/web/20120823212827/https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/06/the-management-myth/304883/

#15yrsago 216 “untranslatable” emotional words from non-English languages https://www.drtimlomas.com/lexicography/cm4mi/lexicography#!lexicography/cm4mi

#10yrsago New York public employees union will vote on pulling out of hedge funds https://web.archive.org/web/20160414230326/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-13/nyc-pension-weighs-liquidating-1-5-billion-hedge-fund-portfolio

#10yrsago Panama’s public prosecutor says he can’t find any evidence of Mossack-Fonseca’s lawbreaking https://web.archive.org/web/20160419165306/https://www.thejournal.ie/mossack-fonseca-prosecution-2714795-Apr2016/?utm_source=twitter_self

#10yrsago Bernie Sanders responds to CEOs of Verizon and GE: “I welcome their contempt” https://web.archive.org/web/20160415165051/https://www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-verizon-contempt-2016-4

#10yrsago Let’s Encrypt is actually encrypting the whole Web https://www.wired.com/2016/04/scheme-encrypt-entire-web-actually-working/

#10yrsago City of San Francisco tells man he can’t live in wooden box in friend’s living room https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/13/san-francisco-new-home-rented-box-illegal?CMP=tmb_gu

#10yrsago How the UK’s biggest pharmacy chain went from family-run public service to debt-laden hedge-fund disaster https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/13/how-boots-went-rogue

#10yrsago Ohio newspaper chain owner says his papers don’t publish articles about LGBTQ people https://ideatrash.net/2016/04/the-owner-of-four-town-papers-in-ohio.html

#10yrsago How British journalists talk about people they’re not allowed to talk about https://web.archive.org/web/20160414152933/https://popbitch.com/home/2016/03/31/up-the-injunction/

#10yrsago Brussels terrorists kept their plans in an unencrypted folder called “TARGET” https://www.techdirt.com/2016/04/14/brussels-terrorist-laptop-included-details-planned-attack-unencrypted-folder-titled-target/

#10yrsago Ron Wyden vows to filibuster anti-cryptography bill https://www.techdirt.com/2016/04/14/burr-feinstein-officially-release-anti-encryption-bill-as-wyden-promises-to-filibuster-it/

#10yrsago Paramount wants to kill a fan-film by claiming copyright on the Klingon language https://torrentfreak.com/paramount-we-do-own-the-klingon-language-and-warships-160414/

#5yrsago Murder Offsets https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/14/for-sale-green-indulgences/#killer-analogy

#5yrsago The FCC wants your broadband measurements https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/14/for-sale-green-indulgences/#fly-my-pretties

#1yrago Machina economicus https://pluralistic.net/2025/04/14/timmy-share/#a-superior-moral-justification-for-selfishness


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 Reverse-Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book about being a better AI critic, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, June 2026 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374621568/thereversecentaursguidetolifeafterai/)

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

  • "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, 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. Third draft completed. Submitted to editor.

  • "The Reverse Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book for Farrar, Straus and Giroux about being an effective AI critic. LEGAL REVIEW AND COPYEDIT COMPLETE.

  • "The Post-American Internet," a short book about internet policy in the age of Trumpism. PLANNING.

  • 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
10 minutes ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete
1 public comment
cjheinz
39 minutes ago
reply
Are we done?
Lexington, KY; Naples, FL

Ukraine Says Russians are Surrendering to Robots

1 Share
Ukraine Says Russians are Surrendering to Robots

Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskyy praised robots as the future of war in a Defense Industry Worker Day address on Monday. “For the first time in the history of this war, an enemy position was taken exclusively by unmanned platforms—ground systems and drones. The occupiers surrendered, and the operation was carried out without infantry and without losses on our side,” Zelenskyy said.

Zelenskyy didn’t specify which ground operation he was referring to, but Ukraine’s 13th National Guard Brigade Khartiya conducted an operation north of Kharkiv in December last year that fits the bill. The Wall Street Journal reported on the operation which it said involved 50 aerial drones and an unspecified number of land drones.

The Journal watched footage of the assault provided by Ukraine. “The robot wars began,”  it said. “Russian FPV drones appeared, launching themselves at the land vehicles, according to the footage. One came close to destroying a land drone, which fired back at the Russian line with a mounted machine gun.”

Ukraine won the fight and took the position, but the Journal didn’t report that any Russians surrendered. A spokesperson for the 13th National Guard Brigade Khartiya told the Journal that they found Russian corpses when they sent humans into the position to secure it.

According to Zelenskyy’s Defense Industry Worker Day speech, ground based robots have conducted 22,000 missions on the frontlines of the war in Ukraine in the past three months. “In other words, lives were saved more than 22,000 times when a robot went into the most dangerous areas instead of a warrior. This is about high technology protecting the highest value—human life,” Zelenskyy said.

It’s unclear which of the 22,000 missions included the surrender. It may seem like a stretch to imagine a soldier surrendering to an unmanned ground vehicle with an assault rifle and a camera strapped to it, but similar things have happened over the past four years of war. The conflict has become defined by the use of drones on both sides and there’s lots of footage of Russian soldiers surrendering to flying drones.

One of the most famous incidents occurred in 2022 but it became so common that Ukraine established a program called “I Want to Live” that used drones to facilitate surrenders. Ukraine’s armed forces released video instructions about how to surrender to a drone. Russian soldiers could text ahead of time, make an appointment to flee the frontline, wait for a Ukrainian drone, and follow it out of combat with their hands in the air. It’s possible the world will see similar footage in the future, but the drones will be on the ground instead.

The War in Ukraine has ground on for years now and become a war of attrition and inches. The loss of life on both sides is devastating and the proliferation of flying drones has created vast no-man’s lands between Russian and Ukrainian positions. Despite Zelenskyy’s praise of Ukraine’s robotics industry, it’s unclear if embracing UGV as a replacement for infantry will change that reality.

But the world is watching and taking notes. The Pentagon is working on its own ground drones, some of them controlled by AI systems. The U.S. Army is testing one system, called the ULTRA, in Vaziani, Georgia near the country’s border with Russia. Ukraine also helped the US soldiers counter Shahed drones during the recent war with Iran.

On stage, Zelenskyy’s Defense Industry Worker Day speech stressed the importance of Ukraine to Europe and the rest of the world. “We are not building new cooperation with partners on weapons the way it was done in the 1990s or early 2000s, when Ukrainian weapons and strength were sold off like a Black Friday sale,” he said. “We are not making fairs of our weapons, nor are we emptying our stockpiles. We are offering security partnerships.”

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

Weltweit wurden Plakate von Boards of Canada gesichtet

1 Share

Eine Reihe von Postern, die den unverkennbaren Stil von Boards of Canada und ein mit dem Geschwisterduo assoziiertes Logo aufweisen, sind auf der ganzen Welt aufgetaucht. Die Poster sind an verschiedenen Orten auf der ganzen Welt aufgetaucht, darunter in der Mare Street und in Soho in London, im Tokioter Club Liquidroom, an Restaurantfassaden in New York und auf dem Walk of Fame in Hollywood.

Fans begannen Anfang dieser Woche, Fotos der Poster im Reddit-Thread „Boards of Canada“ zu teilen, bevor Warp Records, das langjährige Label der beiden, die Spekulationen bestätigte, indem es gestern ohne jeglichen Kontext ebenfalls Fotos der Poster teilte.

Auf jedem der Poster befindet sich in der unteren Ecke ein sechseckiges Logo. Das gleiche, das auf mysteriösen VHS-Kassetten zu sehen war, die letzte Woche über den Vertriebsdienst von Bleep an regelmäßige Käufer von Warp-Veröffentlichungen verschickt wurden.

Ein Fan bemerkte, dass die verzerrte Musik des Tapes eine Stimme „rückwärts“ gespielte Version von „Little Star“ von The Elegants sei, das das schwer fassbare schottische Duo in ihrem „Societas X Tape“ verwendete, einem zweistündigen Mixtape, das 2019 auf NTS Radio ausgestrahlt wurde.

Offiziell ist das alles noch nicht, aber es würde mich wundern, wenn dann jetzt bald ein neues Album kommen wird. Es würde auf „Tomorrow’s Harvest“ im Jahr 2013 folgen, das ebenfalls mit einer kryptischen Vorabkampagne angekündigt wurde. Wenn das mal kein Grund zur Vorfreude ist.

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

Thomson Reuters Fired Worker For Speaking Out About ICE, Former Employee Says

1 Share
Thomson Reuters Fired Worker For Speaking Out About ICE, Former Employee Says

Thomson Reuters, the technology and content conglomerate that owns the Reuters media agency but also owns and operates the investigative CLEAR database, fired a longstanding employee after they spoke out about the company selling data products to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), according to a lawsuit filed on Tuesday.

The lawsuit and firing come after more than 200 employees wrote a letter to Thomson Reuters leadership about the company’s contracts with ICE and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

“For nearly two decades, I helped Thomson Reuters build the legal resources that lawyers and law enforcement trust. When I saw evidence that our products were being used to harm people and undermine the law, I did what anyone should do—I raised the alarm. Thomson Reuters’ response was to fire me,” Billie Little, who was a senior attorney editor at Thomson Reuters, said in a statement shared with 404 Media by her attorneys. 

💡
Do you work at Thomson Reuters or know anything else about CLEAR? I would love to hear from you. Using a non-work device, you can message me securely on Signal at joseph.404 or send me an email at joseph@404media.co.

Thomson Reuters fired Little on March 20, according to a press release Little’s attorneys sent to 404 Media on Tuesday. It says that Little led hundreds of coworkers to raise concerns that Thomson Reuters’ CLEAR database “was being used to compile and deliver sensitive personal and location data to federal immigration authorities in ways that circumvented and violated state sanctuary laws, privacy protections, and the Constitution.”

CLEAR is Thomson Reuters’ primary data broker product. It contains all sorts of personal data, including peoples’ names, addresses, car registration information, Social Security numbers, and details on someone’s ethnicity. 404 Media has repeatedly revealed links between CLEAR and specific ICE tools, including references to CLEAR in documentation for the Palantir tool ICE uses to find neighborhoods to raid called ELITE, and a license plate reader app called Mobile Companion.

In early March, the Minnesota Star Tribune reported Thomson Reuters employees wrote the letter to leadership expressing their unease with the company’s ICE and DHS contracts. Later that month, The New York Times reported more than 200 employees had signed the letter.

After that coverage, Thomson Reuters launched an internal investigation targeting Little, and was fired nine days later for an unspecified code of conduct violation, according to the press release.

The lawsuit, which 404 Media reviewed, claims that “Little is, to her knowledge, the only employee who was fired. She was singled out because she was the most visible leader and Thomson Reuters sought to make an example of her.”

The lawsuit is filed in the District Court for the District Oregon and is seeking reinstatement, back pay, compensatory damages, and attorney fees, the press release says.

“Oregon's whistleblower law exists for exactly this situation. It protects employees who report in good faith that their employer may be breaking the law. Thomson Reuters should have thanked Billie for raising concerns about the use of its products instead of hiding behind a vague Code of Conduct violation to punish an employee for exercising rights that Oregon law expressly guarantees,” Maria Witt, an attorney from Albies & Stark LLC representing Little, said in a statement.

Thomson Reuters did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

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

Neural Computing: your boss thinks the AI will become a PC

1 Share

Today’s preprint is “Neural Computers” from Meta and KAUST. This proposes a fabulous new computing paradigm — where an AI does all the work of a computer! You just tell the bot to do computery things and it simulates a computer to do them! In the fabulous future. [blog post; arXiv, PDF]

I’ve had a couple of people say their management are enraptured by this paper. The bosses are amazed at the possibilities the AI could give them.

What are those possibilities? Beats me. I’m looking at the paper, and it’s like a marketer did a PowerPoint and his boss told him to stretch it into a writeup. Here’s what the researchers promise:

Unlike conventional computers, which execute explicit programs, agents, which act over external execution environments, and world models, which learn environment dynamics, NCs aim to make the model itself the running computer.

So it’s a computer … but it’s the AI doing all the stuff. That’s the dream, anyway.

How does it work? What does the AI do?

Concretely, we instantiate NCs as video models that roll out screen frames from instructions, pixels, and user actions (when available).

That is, their demo is based on an AI video generator. It responds to user actions by trying to generate the next bit of video. That’s it. That’s the whole thing.

Remember the Google demo of an AI-simulated version of Doom from 2024? It was quite a cool demo video — until you noticed it was just assembled from all the short clips they could make that didn’t suck. And it couldn’t remember where objects were. And the number display didn’t work.

That AI Doom demo had idiots claiming this would replace game developers any day now. The vision of Neural Computing is the same.

How well does neural computing do? The output looks like a computer screen, except it’s worse, it mangles the text and the images, and it doesn’t work reliably. They say themselves:

Current prototypes already show early hints of runtime primitives.

That means they don’t actually have even that much. There are demo videos which are clearly just fragments of screen captures being played back from the model’s training.

Some of you might remember the NeuralOS paper from 2025. That’s basically the same trick — for that paper, they trained a video generator on hours of recordings of someone using Ubuntu Linux. And that’s fine? There’s nothing wrong with trying a silly idea to see what happens, even if it doesn’t work. [arXiv, 2025]

The neural computer paper does cite the NeuralOS paper, even though it doesn’t really offer anything more. Except wild hype.

And oh boy, that hype! The early failing demo is an excuse to speculate as hard as possible. Agents work so well! (They don’t work well.) The conventional computer has “structural friction”!

Some of the claims are just gibberish:

Conventional computers are already rewriting their own substrate for AI.

What?

This paper and its blog post are a sea of speculation. They use “is” when they mean “might”, they claim things work that don’t work, and they rapidly decay into LinkedIn slurry. It’s a new paradigm! Don’t be left behind!

So why are the bosses going nuts over this barely sketched out idea? What do they see in this?

The people who love the idea of Neural Computing don’t understand how a computer works. It’s just a black box that annoys them.

But they love using the chatbot. It’s great! It’s their buddy! It tells them they’re so smart!

This paper is selling the promise of a computer, but it’s your friend the chatbot. Computers are hard — but what if AI could make the annoying bit go away, by magic?

Eventually you just get a computer running on another computer, but slow and not reliable. At which point it’s Sycophant OS. You’re so right! You wanted to keep those files! That’s on me.

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