…I mean…I guess it depends what you mean…who’s “we”…what does or doesn’t have to happen…what the “have to” part boils down to…like…I “have to” get something up here…but it’s basically due now & I haven’t really got started…& in reality that means I could do several things & I don’t actually have to do the one I wind up doing…which I’m thinking is just stick this bit up & then have it balloon in fits & starts as I chug coffee & develop momentum…which…could be diagnosed as a “have to” of its own suggestive of some sort of compulsive disorder on my part…which…I’d have to admit…the part where an embarrassingly high proportion of the total volume of text in these parts that has my name attached to it…not to mention the proportion of that you might choose to consider “constructive”…does make a pretty compelling case about…more compelling than vlad claiming ISIS was in cahoots with ukraine (& presumably by ukraine he means the nazis he keeps claiming are in charge of that side of things – who’d be pretty strange bedfellows for islamic extremists looking to create a caliphate bigger than the zone of US influence/genghis kahn’s go at conquering the known world/the british empire in its pomp)…so stranger things have literally happened?

In the past the Kremlin acknowledged its opponent and dealt ruthlessly with Islamist extremists. This time, however, Putin made no mention of the organization that credibly claimed responsibility, an Afghan offshoot of the Islamic State known as ISIS-K, and instead cast indirect and utterly unsubstantiated suspicion on Ukraine.

He said the criminals acted like the Nazis invaders who once slaughtered helpless civilians to intimidate the population, a charge meant to echo Putin’s regular depiction of the Ukrainian leadership as neo-Nazis. And the four attackers who were apprehended, he said, were moving in the direction of Ukraine, where he said a “window was prepared” for their escape.

It was not a particularly believable story — the Russia-Ukraine border is arguably among the most militarized on earth. But the claim reflected Putin’s problem: coming on the heels of a staged election which was intended to glorify him as the only leader who can assure the Russians security against sworn enemies in Ukraine and the West, the attack was an obvious and devastating failure of intelligence and policing.

The failure was all the more acute since the United States had warned him that it had intelligence of an impending attack in Russia, a warning Putin dismissed.

Many expatriate Russian bloggers — a population that has swelled with Putin’s repression — warned from the outset that Putin would seek to implicate Ukraine and the West in the attack. After that, many surmised, he would use the attack to rally people behind the government and to launch another mobilization of men for the Ukraine war.

Domestically, many reactions on the internet seemed to embrace the Kremlin’s conspiracy theories. One preposterous version, quoted by Radio Liberty/Radio Free Europe, said it made sense that Washington would deflect blame from Ukraine, since the U.S. helped create ISIS.

For Putin, Even a Terrorist Attack Is a Chance to Spread Misinformation [NYT]

…&…if the front pages of the papers in the UK are a guide…we do in fact have to keep talking about the royal family…even if half of the talk is talking about how we talk too much about them (not us, obviously, just all the other people doing what they’re doing)…& whether or not you think the lady doth protest too much…with the inevitable exception of her exaltedness tay-tay the first

The ‘Taylor Swift effect’ aims to provide water during Brazil’s life-threatening heat waves [NBC]

…what’s a girl gotta do to get noticed?

Even in the context of the current pantsless trend prevalent on the runway and in some celebrity circles, as well as the vogue for thematic dressing at movie openings, Kristen Stewart’s looks during her press tour for “Love Lies Bleeding” have stood out. Rarely has an actress been so unapologetically, gloriously undressed.

Ms. Stewart and her stylist, Tara Swennen, have taken the film’s carnality and covert politics and translated them for the promotional panopticon, forcing anybody watching to confront their own preconceptions about women’s bodies, their sexuality and exactly what empowerment means, while at the same time undermining the whole circus of branded celebrity dressing.

That’s a lot of subtext under very little — clothing, that is. But it was adroitly managed and awfully entertaining to see.
[…]
It started in Berlin back in February, when Ms. Stewart shed her shirt for the film’s European premiere, wearing a very short Chanel couture patchwork miniskirt, matching blazer and knit bralet. (She is a Chanel ambassador.) She raised the ante with a controversial Rolling Stone cover in which she wore only a Nike tank top and a jockstrap.

And when she showed up for the film’s Los Angeles premiere in only a “skirts, who needs ’em?” Bettter bodysuit, cut very high on the thigh, with sheer black tights, a black blazer and black stilettos, it was clear that such choices were not mere flukes but a conscious strategy.
[…]
As it happens, the motto of Bettter, a label that repurposes men’s suiting for women, is “empower rather than overpower.” Which, given the movie being celebrated, a queer film noir set in a small town in 1980s New Mexico and, as one reviewer wrote, a “deconstruction of cinematic hypermasculinity,” is pretty much on the nose.
[…]
The clothes were like a dare to the watching world, a refusal to cater to pretty-girls-in-pretty-dresses gender expectations and a good-natured riposte to the idea that provocation is an invitation. An “I see your judgment and raise you one” piece of fashion politics.

In so orchestrating her outfits, Ms. Stewart, who looked as if she was enjoying herself quite a lot, thank you, demonstrated just how much can be said on the pseudo red carpet even without an E! host asking the point of what she was wearing. You really couldn’t miss her point. After all, she wasn’t exactly covering it up.

Kristen Stewart Uses Naked Dressing to Make a Point [NYT]

…I’m not quite sure which rule that would be making an exceptional example in hopes of proving…although it’s not hard to think of some rules of thumb [was gonna link the OED entry there but it’s like the real one…you got’s to pay…so…if you’ll take my word for it…the O.G. rule of thumb as quoted in a thing a judge said in court in britain by a scottish minister dates back to the 1600s…& although the single appearance the phrase makes in approximately every “million words in modern written english” (however the hell the OED thinks it knows a thing like that) gets to pick between four meanings they recognise (it’s the OED, people…it doesn’t take a “z” for these people) that first one is literally “a man may beat his spouse without penalty provided the rod he chooses not to spare her is no thicker than his thumb”…so…while everyone’s having a long, hard think about how beastly they’ve been to the one lucky girl who grew up to be a princess…could we maybe spare a thought for the cudgels employed against…well…damsels in distress who don’t get to have things like footmen & equerries to fend off incursions into their personal space?

Alarms are blaring about artificial intelligence deepfakes that manipulate voters, like the robocall sounding like President Biden that went to New Hampshire households, or the fake video of Taylor Swift endorsing Donald Trump.

Yet there’s actually a far bigger problem with deepfakes that we haven’t paid enough attention to: deepfake nude videos and photos that humiliate celebrities and unknown children alike. One recent study found that 98 percent of deepfake videos online were pornographic and that 99 percent of those targeted were women or girls.

Faked nude imagery of Taylor Swift rattled the internet in January, but this goes way beyond her: Companies make money by selling advertising and premium subscriptions for websites hosting fake sex videos of famous female actresses, singers, influencers, princesses and politicians. Google directs traffic to these graphic videos, and victims have little recourse.

Sometimes the victims are underage girls.
[…]
While there have always been doctored images, artificial intelligence makes the process much easier. With just a single good image of a person’s face, it is now possible in just half an hour to make a 60-second sex video of that person. Those videos can then be posted on general pornographic websites for anyone to see, or on specialized sites for deepfakes.

The videos there are graphic and sometimes sadistic, depicting women tied up as they are raped or urinated on, for example. One site offers categories including “rape” (472 items), “crying” (655) and “degradation” (822).
[…]
In addition, there are the “nudify” or “undressing” websites and apps of the kind that targeted Francesca. “Undress on a click!” one urges. These overwhelmingly target women and girls; some are not even capable of generating a naked male. A British study of child sexual images produced by artificial intelligence reported that 99.6 percent were of girls, most commonly between 7 and 13 years old.

Graphika, an online analytics company, identified 34 nudify websites that received a combined 24 million unique visitors in September alone.

…whichever way you see the part where that’s a man writing that in terms of which gender it might be that needs to get its fucking act together…pun not entirely but maybe kinda intended…I have an aunt who I’m exceedingly fond of who in turn is fond of the phrase “talking about you, not to you”…& whether that’s talking about…or around…or across…or over…or just past…whose fault do you suppose it might be if when something finally cuts through the braying din that makes them sit up & take notice it sounds a trifle “shrill”…it might surprise them to know that some thesauruses list “piercing” as a viable alternative…or thesauri if you prefer…although to be honest if it were about what I prefer I’d go thesaurii…which is probably wrong per latin grammar…but I like it better…so…I dunno…sue me? …it’s sunday…it’s a bit rich to presume I have to be going anywhere with this, really…but…I suppose if I don’t at least try the risk that I’ll never bloody stop starts flickering its needle in & out of the red in an alarming sort of a way…& judged by the metric of how much I seem to hear from who these days down in the comments…I & the usual suspects causing more than our share of the scrolling in these parts are already in danger of keeping the more skittish denizens of our virtual watering hole in a functionally perma-spooked state as it is…so…if I can manage to not just rein it in but pull it around to look like I’m pointed in some sort of direction that might imply a destination showing up is at least a potential eventuality

When Francesca was targeted, her family consulted the police and lawyers but found no remedy. “There’s nobody to turn to,” said her mother, Dorota Mani. “The police say, ‘Sorry, we can’t do anything.’”

The problem is that there isn’t a law that has been clearly broken. “We just continue to be unable to have a legal framework that can be nimble enough to address the tech,” said Yiota Souras, the chief legal officer for the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children.

Sophie Compton, a documentary maker, made a film on the topic, “Another Body,” and was so appalled that she started a campaign and website, MyImageMyChoice.org, to push for change.

…after all…when it comes to the eye of the beholder

“It’s become a kind of crazy industry, completely based on the violation of consent,” Compton said.

The impunity reflects a blasé attitude toward the humiliation of victims. One survey found that 74 percent of deepfake pornography users reported not feeling guilty about watching the videos.

…when “I’m in this picture & I don’t like it” is the flip-side

“Most survivors I talk to say they contemplated suicide,” said Andrea Powell, who works with people who have been deepfaked and develops strategies to address the problem.

…after all…mostly the fairer sex gets by on terms that are…less fair, let’s say…than those enjoyed by your kristen…or taylor…or kate…&…from some perspectives those aren’t exactly a level playing field even at the top of their game…& between who gets a say…& who gets to say…& whether or not saying it says anything that serves the purpose the sayer says it does…statistically speaking the odds seem high that the ones saying they don’t see where it’s their problem or their behavior they ought to address…are sorely in need of cultivating their listening skills…there may be some dog-whistles these days you don’t need to be a dog to hear…but apparently there’s still a shit-ton of stuff that stinks that is somehow out of range of the hearing of a surprising number of mothers’ sons?

This is a burden that falls disproportionately on prominent women. One deepfake website displays the official portrait of a female member of Congress — and then 28 fake sex videos of her. Another website has 90. (I’m not linking to these sites because, unlike Google, I’m not willing to direct traffic to these sites and further enable them to profit from displaying nonconsensual imagery.)

…which isn’t to say boys don’t need sympathy, too

In rare cases, deepfakes have targeted boys, often for “sextortion,” in which a predator threatens to disseminate embarrassing images unless the victim pays money or provides nudes. The F.B.I. last year warned of an increase in deepfakes used for sextortion, which has sometimes been a factor in child suicides.

…but…I mean…”don’t be evil”…easier said than done?

“The images look SCARY real and there’s even a video of me doing disgusting things that also look SCARY real,” one 14-year-old reported to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. That child sent debit card information to a predator who threatened to post the fakes online.

As I see it, Google and other search engines are recklessly directing traffic to porn sites with nonconsensual deepfakes. Google is essential to the business model of these malicious companies.

…I mean…if corporations get to be “people”…& let’s face it they’re just about all men, if that’s how we’re casting that…then they must also be equally fair game for being noted for their copious & conspicuous moral failings…if facebook really…at heart…is still zuck teetering on the precipice of life as an incel before his desire to pass judgement on the physical appearance of his female peers behind their backs from his dormroom perch behind a keyboard like the fearless warriors of our modern culture warring age…& twitter is a man more divorced than sinned against experiencing the best-funded mid-life crisis in the annals of history while charting a course directly into being that one uncle you wish you didn’t have to invite to thanks-giving because all that remains visible of him above the rabbit hole is his ass hanging out…would so many people be in such an all-fired hurry to keep throwing money at them?

In other spheres, Google does the right thing. Ask “How do I kill myself?” and it won’t offer step-by-step guidance — instead, its first result is a suicide helpline. Ask “How do I poison my spouse?” and it’s not very helpful. In other words, Google is socially responsible when it wants to be, but it seems indifferent to women and girls being violated by pornographers.

“Google really has to take responsibility for enabling this kind of problem,” Breeze Liu, herself a victim of revenge porn and deepfakes, told me. “It has the power to stop this.”

*cough*

The disinformation war has taken a toll, but researchers feel a shift [NBC]

*cough*

Fewer people are using Elon Musk’s X as the platform struggles to attract and keep users, according to analysts

*choke*

[X usage has declined as downloads of Threads have surged in recent weeks. – NBC]

*cough*

Elon Musk Is Preoccupied With Something He Doesn’t Understand [NYT]

*cough*

Reddit goes public today. Users are wary of what comes next. [WaPo]

*cough*

Israel announces largest West Bank land seizure since 1993 during Blinken visit [WaPo]

*cough*

Trump Media merger wins investor approval, netting Trump potential windfall [WaPo]

*hack*

What could happen as Trump faces deadline on half-billion-dollar bond [WaPo]

*hack*

The last time a Trump company went public it didn’t go well for investors [NBC]

*splutter*

Trump claims he has $500 million in cash, undercutting his lawyers [WaPo]

*ahem*

‘The Blues Brothers’ was gloriously dumb. It still matters. [WaPo]

*cough*

Putting chaplains in public school is the latest battle in culture wars [WaPo]

*wheeze*

Trump escalates solidarity with Jan. 6 rioters as his own trials close in [WaPo]

*sob*

They fled Afghanistan after Biden’s withdrawal. Now in the US, they hope Trump wins [Guardian]

*sniff*

In defying Joe Biden, Benjamin Netanyahu is exposing the limits of US power [Guardian]

*hurk*

What is the real Hamas? [Guardian]

*gasp*

Trump pleads with supporters for cash to help pay soaring legal bills [Guardian]

*cough*

A guide to difficult conversations for people who hate confrontation [Vox]

*cough*

A New Surge in Power Use Is Threatening U.S. Climate Goals [NYT]

*cough*

Reddit’s I.P.O. Is a Content Moderation Success Story [NYT]

*cough*

Republican House majority to shrink as Mike Gallagher steps down [Guardian]

*cough*

Overworked, underpaid, under attack: on the frontlines in a US election office [Guardian]

*cough*

Playground bullies do prosper – and go on to earn more in middle age [Guardian]

*cough*

US Senate passes $1.2tn spending package to avert government shutdown

*wheeze* [like muttley]

Dogs can understand the meaning of nouns, new research finds [Guardian]

*splutter*

‘It’ll be bedlam’: how Trump is creating conditions for a post-election eruption [Guardian]

*gasp*

During an outdoor speech that was whipped by strong winds and punctuated by some profane language, Trump predicted that if he does not win the Nov. 5 general election, American democracy will come to an end.

“If we don’t win this election, I don’t think you’re going to have another election in this country,” Trump said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-predicts-end-us-democracy-if-he-loses-2024-election-2024-03-17/

*hack*

One Way Back review: Christine Blasey Ford faces down Brett Kavanaugh again [Guardian]

*cough*

How rightwing groups used junk science to get an abortion case before the US supreme court [Guardian]

*cough*

Why do we do things that are bad for us? The ancient philosophers had an answer [Guardian]

*hack* *choke* *splutter*

These talkshow hosts once called Trump a bully, an idiot and a wussy. That was then [Guardian]

*wracking sob*

‘Man-made starvation’: the obstacles to Gaza aid deliveries – visual guide [Guardian]

*choke*

Biden vs. Trump is both static and unstable. What could change things? [WaPo]

…fuck…I thought that lot would be the end of me before I got to the end of this for a minute, there…let me catch my breath while I rally round & see if I can remember where I was before getting overcome that way

“Google really has to take responsibility for enabling this kind of problem,” Breeze Liu, herself a victim of revenge porn and deepfakes, told me. “It has the power to stop this.”

…oh…right…yeah…that was it…how about…& I realize this might seem an alarming rule of thumb…but

…how about…for a change…we ask the fucking ladies

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calls Israeli Gaza campaign an ‘unfolding genocide’ [Guardian]

…quite why so many of these assholes spend so much god-damn-ed blood & treasure taking the gentle out of gentlemen?

“We are being slut-shamed and the perpetrators are completely running free,” she told me. “It doesn’t make sense.”

[…&…finally got around to the part that made me pick the title combo for the post…in case anyone cares?]

Liu, who previously had worked for a venture capital firm in technology, founded a start-up, Alecto AI, that aims to help victims of nonconsensual pornography locate images of themselves and then get them removed. A pilot of the Alecto app is now available free for Apple and Android devices, and Liu hopes to establish partnerships with tech firms to help remove nonconsensual content.
[…]
Google agrees that there is room for improvement. No Google official was willing to discuss the problem with me on the record, but Cathy Edwards, a vice president for search at the company, issued a statement that said, “We understand how distressing this content can be, and we’re committed to building on our existing protections to help people who are affected.”

“We’re actively developing additional safeguards on Google Search,” the statement added, noting that the company has set up a process where deepfake victims can apply to have these links removed from search results.

A Microsoft spokeswoman, Caitlin Roulston, offered a similar statement, noting that the company has a web form allowing people to request removal of a link to nude images of themselves from Bing search results. The statement encouraged users to adjust safe search settings to “block undesired adult content” and acknowledged that “more work needs to be done.”
[…]
Count me unimpressed. I don’t see why Google and Bing should direct traffic to deepfake websites whose business is nonconsensual imagery of sex and nudity. Search engines are pillars of that sleazy and exploitative ecosystem. You can do better, Google and Bing.

A.I. companies aren’t as culpable as Google, but they haven’t been as careful as they could be. Rebecca Portnoff, vice president for data science at Thorn, a nonprofit that builds technology to combat child sexual abuse, notes that A.I. models are trained using scraped imagery from the internet, but they can be steered away from websites that include child sexual abuse. The upshot: They can’t so easily generate what they don’t know.

…speaking of what you don’t know & how it can hurt you

President Biden signed a promising executive order last year to try to bring safeguards to artificial intelligence, including deepfakes, and several bills have been introduced in Congress. Some states have enacted their own measures.

…something’s better than nothing & all…but…why don’t we ask the ladies how that looks like it’s going?

I’m in favor of trying to crack down on deepfakes with criminal law, but it’s easy to pass a law and difficult to enforce it. A more effective tool might be simpler: civil liability for damages these deepfakes cause. Tech companies are now largely excused from liability under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, but if this were amended and companies knew that they faced lawsuits and had to pay damages, their incentives would change and they would police themselves. And the business model of some deepfake companies would collapse.

Senator Michael Bennet, a Democrat of Colorado, and others have proposed a new federal regulatory body to oversee technology companies and new media, just as the Federal Communications Commission oversees old media. That makes sense to me.

…hope she has a better track record of shit panning out in the ways that make sense to her than I do

Australia seems a step ahead of other countries in regulating deepfakes, and perhaps that’s in part because a Perth woman, Noelle Martin, was targeted at age 17 by someone who doctored an image of her into porn. Outraged, she became a lawyer and has devoted herself to fighting such abuse and lobbying for tighter regulations.

…&…if life must imitate art…I’m down for taking a time out from trying to put brave new world, 1984 & fahrenheit 451 in a blender before chugging down the resultant shake every morning…to listen to a few sisters doing it for themselves…speaking for myself

One result has been a wave of retaliatory fake imagery meant to hurt her. Some included images of her underage sister.

“This form of abuse is potentially permanent,” Martin told me. “This abuse affects a person’s education, employability, future earning capacity, reputation, interpersonal relationships, romantic relationships, mental and physical health — potentially in perpetuity.”

The greatest obstacles to regulating deepfakes, I’ve come to believe, aren’t technical or legal — although those are real — but simply our collective complacency.

Society was also once complacent about domestic violence and sexual harassment. In recent decades, we’ve gained empathy for victims and built systems of accountability that, while imperfect, have fostered a more civilized society.

…for fuck’s fucking sake, lads…you’re better than this…pobody’s nerfect but buck the fuck up, already…this is literally why you can’t have nice things…like the ladies…do I need to draw you a fucking picture or are you too busy playing kiss-chase with your own fucking ass?

It’s time for similar accountability in the digital space. New technologies are arriving, yes, but we needn’t bow to them. It astonishes me that society apparently believes that women and girls must accept being tormented by demeaning imagery. Instead, we should stand with victims and crack down on deepfakes that allow companies to profit from sexual degradation, humiliation and misogyny.

The Online Degradation of Women and Girls That We Meet With a Shrug [NYT]

…&…whether because you think it makes sense in a virtual context…or because that doesn’t sound to you like fun any more & you’re headed AFK…it ought to go double IRL

…motherfuckers

…lemme see about tracking down a tune-full of sugar in case that tasted like medicine…& let’s hear it for…but preferably from…the ladies?