Enlarge (credit: PM Images | DigitalVision)

On Wednesday, Colorado expanded the scope of its privacy law initially designed to protect biometric data like fingerprints or face images to become first in the nation to also shield sensitive neural data.

That could stop companies from hoarding brain activity data without residents realizing the risks. The New York Times reported that neural data is increasingly being collected and sold nationwide. And after a market analysis showed that investments in neurotechnology leapt by 60 percent globally from 2019 to 2020—and were valued at $30 billion in 2021—Big Tech companies have significantly intensified plans to develop their own products to rake in potentially billions.

For instance, in 2023, Meta demoed a wristband with a neural interface used to control its smart glasses and unveiled an AI system that could be used to decode the mind. In January, Elon Musk announced that Neuralink implanted its first brain chip in a human that can be used to control a device with their thoughts. And just last month, Apple Insider reported that "Apple is working on technology that could turn the Apple Vision Pro into a brainwave reader to improve mental health, assist with training and workouts, and help with mindfulness."

Many technologies collect neural data for a variety of purposes, The Times reported. The tech has gone from inspiring medical uses leading to breakthrough treatments to personal uses like monitoring brain activity to help people meditate or interpreting brain signals to try to help users find better matches on dating apps. But not every user understands exactly how their neural data may otherwise be used.

Colorado's law requires tech companies to gain consent to collect neural data and to be more transparent about how such data is used. Additionally, it must be easy for people to access, delete, or correct any neural data gathered that could be used—either on its own or in combination with other personal data—"for identification purposes."

Companies must also provide paths for users to opt out of the sale of their neural data or use of their data in targeted advertising. "Tracking a person's brain activity in real time" could give Big Tech the ultimate tool for targeted ads by theoretically offering "a more reliable, more precise, and personalized representation of an ad’s effectiveness," Undark reported.

Through neurotechnologies, companies "have access to the records of the users’ brain activity—the electrical signals underlying our thoughts, feelings, and intentions," NYT reported, but until now, they've gone largely unregulated in the US.

In Colorado, Democratic State Representative Cathy Kipp pushed for the privacy law updates by introducing a bill after a member of the board of directors of the Colorado Medical Society, Sean Pauzauskie, told her about loopholes in state laws.

Pauzauskie has since become medical director of The Neurorights Foundation, a charitable organization dedicated to promoting ethical neurotechnology innovation while protecting human rights. The Times noted that advancements in neurotechnology have helped paralyzed patients communicate through computers, which are widely viewed as important medical breakthroughs that critically rely on tech-monitoring brainwaves.

Kipp's bill warned that neural data "can reveal intimate information about individuals, including health, mental states, emotions, and cognitive function" but "outside of medical settings" can "operate without regulation or data protection standards."

“The things that people can do with this technology are great,” Kipp told NYT. “But we just think that there should be some guardrails in place for people who aren’t intending to have their thoughts read and their biological data used.”

Kipp told NYT that her concern in passing Colorado's law was ensuring that nobody's brain activity was being monitored without consent. In a report, Neurorights has warned that companies seem to have lax stances when it comes to sharing neural data.

Neurorights surveyed privacy policies and user agreements of 30 consumer neurotechnology companies, finding that all but one company had access to neural data and two-thirds of companies were sharing neural data with third parties. Two companies implied they are selling data. Only one company restricted access to neural data, and four companies clearly stated they do not sell neural data.

Hurdles to federal brainwave data protection

Currently, similar legislation is advancing in California and has been introduced in Minnesota, but while Colorado's bill passed unanimously, there has been some notable opposition that could stop the country from embracing Colorado's privacy standards.

Some opposition comes from academic researchers. According to a co-sponsor of Colorado's bill, Republican State Representative Mark Baisley, private universities fiercely opposed the law because it potentially limited their "ability to train students who are using 'the tools of the trade in neural diagnostics and research' purely for research and teaching purposes," NYT reported.

Other opponents include tech companies. TechNet, which represents companies like Apple, OpenAI, and Meta, pushed for changes in a parallel Colorado bill. TechNet won a battle to update the bill text to include language "focusing the law on regulating brain data used to identify individuals," NYT reported, but lost a battle to ditch "very broad" language relating to data generated by “an individual’s body or bodily functions,” which Colorado's law now includes.

The ACLU raised concerns about limiting the law to only cover data that can be used to identify individuals, which Colorado's law currently does, instead recommending policy that restricts all biometric data collection, retention, storage, and use. In Colorado, this limitation means that companies that don't specifically collect brainwave data for identification purposes—but for other purposes such as decoding someone's thoughts or feelings—won't be impacted by the law.

But although it's maybe not a perfect privacy law, it's still progress, Neurorights co-founder Jared Genser told NYT.

"Given that previously neural data from consumers wasn’t protected at all under the Colorado Privacy Act, to now have it labeled sensitive personal information with equivalent protections as biometric data is a major step forward,” Genser said.

Neurorights is hoping that Colorado's law will inspire federal lawmakers to take similar action soon.

In a post on X, Neurorights celebrated Colorado's law passing, "declaring Colorado the first place in world to legally define and protect neural data as sensitive."

Read Comments

Whether due to possessing potentially fascinating engineering, or it being just plain weird, it’s not all that often that we happen upon some what in the Sam Hill type of automotive technology. Actually, The Autopian is chock-full of it, in fact it’s a cornerstone of this fine publication.

Still, I thought I’d seen it all in regards to pedal boxes. But I was wrong, oh so wrong.

USA/UK-based Era Motorsport recently posted this brief clip on Instagram of the strangest pedal box that I’ve ever seen, so I had to learn more. And, share it with you. Let’s discuss not only why it’s designed this way, but also a little more about the historic Shadow Canadian-American Challenge (Can-Am) race car that it’s fitted to.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Era Motorsport (@era.motorsport)

You see that? The driver’s feet are turned sideways and effectively caged in, unable to do any conventional form of pedal dancing between all three like old Group B rally footage. Not only that, but the brake and gas are on top of each other—I’ve seen some tiny distances between pedals before, but not like this.

It’s got to feel so weird having your feet turned outward/sideways like that when you’re strapped into a tiny race car. Thing looks like it’s as roomy as an iron lung, so when strapped in you probably don’t need any to brace on anything. But still, what a weird sensation.

But here’s the thing: This pedal configuration isn’t the original design.

But before we get to that, allow me to give a little background. The Shadow Mark I was like every other open-top race car of the era: Very tiny, severely lacking in safety equipment by today’s standards, and brutally fast. Since it was in Can-Am, it was especially fast, though possessed no shortage of cool and innovative technology.

Originally integrated into its bodywork were movable flaps that acted as air brakes, centrifugal fans were mounted to its tiny 10-inch wheels to help cool the brakes, and the chassis was incredibly modular and easy to disassemble. Sadly, the movable flaps were outlawed by the rulebook by the time it saw action on track.

Looking through this Shadow’s photo album shows just how wild the engineering—and seating position—general was.

Its original long prototype design meant the driver was almost laying completely flat behind the wheel. Thus, the need for its tiny, rectangular pedal box sporting two pedals.

That’s right: Originally, just the gas and brake lived in this space, and the clutch was actuated via a hand lever. Sounds awfully tough to get used to, assuming its Hewland four-speed gearbox didn’t require the clutch for every shift once up to speed.

Over time, some things were changed and the seating position became more upright, but the pedal situation remained the same.

You can see why either Era, or the shop before it, converted its example’s gas, clutch, and brake setup for modern service in historic racing. Such as the very recent 81st Members Meeting event at Goodwood, which included a number of other Can-Am racers by Shadow, Porsche, McLaren, and more. Besides my newfound fascination with weird pedal boxes, I’m quite excited to see more Can-Am mixed in with Goodwood’s normal top-notch coverage of vintage racing.

The post This Vintage Can-Am Racer Has The Coolest-Slash-Oddest Pedal Box appeared first on The Autopian.

Today's links

• Podcasting "Capitalists Hate Capitalism": "Competition is for losers."
• Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
• This day in history: 2004, 2009, 2014, 2019, 2023
• Upcoming appearances: Where to find me.
• Recent appearances: Where I've been.
• Latest books: You keep readin' em, I'll keep writin' 'em.
• Upcoming books: Like I said, I'll keep writin' 'em.
• Colophon: All the rest.

---

Podcasting "Capitalists Hate Capitalism" (permalink)

This week on my podcast, I read "Capitalists Hate Capitalism," my latest column for Locus Magazine:

https://locusmag.com/2024/03/cory-doctorow-capitalists-hate-capitalism/

What do I mean by "capitalists hate capitalism?" It all comes down to the difference between "profits" and "rents." A capitalist takes capital (money, or the things you can buy with it) and combines it with employees' labor, and generates profits (the capitalist's share) and wages (the workers' share).

Rents, meanwhile, come from owning an asset that capitalists need to generate profits. For example, a landlord who rents a storefront to a coffee shop extracts rent from the capitalist who owns the coffee shop. Meanwhile, the capitalist who owns the cafe extracts profits from the baristas' labor.

Capitalists' founding philosophers like Adam Smith hated rents. Worse: rents were the most important source of income at the time of capitalism's founding. Feudal lords owned great swathes of land, and there were armies of serfs who were bound to that land – it was illegal for them to leave it. The serfs owed rent to lords, and so they worked the land in order grow crops and raise livestock that they handed over the to lord as rent for the land they weren't allowed to leave.

Capitalists, meanwhile, wanted to turn that land into grazing territory for sheep as a source of wool for the "dark, Satanic mills" of the industrial revolution. They wanted the serfs to be kicked off their land so that they would become "free labor" that could be hired to work in those factories.

For the founders of capitalism, a "free market" wasn't free from regulation, it was free from rents, and "free labor" came from workers who were free to leave the estates where they were born – but also free to starve unless they took a job with the capitalists.

For capitalism's philosophers, free markets and free labor weren't just a source of profits, they were also a source of virtue. Capitalists – unlike lords – had to worry about competition from one another. They had to make better goods at lower prices, lest their customers take their business elsewhere; and they had to offer higher pay and better conditions, lest their "free labor" take a job elsewhere.

This means that capitalists are haunted by the fear of losing everything, and that fear acts as a goad, driving them to find ways to make everything better for everyone: better, cheaper products that benefit shoppers; and better-paid, safer jobs that benefit workers. For Smith, capitalism is alchemy, a philosopher's stone that transforms the base metal of greed into the gold of public spiritedness.

By contrast, rentiers are insulated from competition. Their workers are bound to the land, and must toil to pay the rent no matter whether they are treated well or abused. The rent rolls in reliably, without the lord having to invest in new, better ways to bring in the harvest. It's a good life (for the lord).

Think of that coffee shop again: if a better cafe opens across the street, the owner can lose it all, as their customers and workers switch allegiance. But for the landlord, the failure of his capitalist tenant is a feature, not a bug. Once the cafe goes bust, the landlord gets a newly vacant storefront on the same block as the hot new coffee shop that can be rented out at even higher rates to another capitalist who tries his luck.

The industrial revolution wasn't just the triumph of automation over craft processes, nor the triumph of factory owners over weavers. It was also the triumph of profits over rents. The transformation of hereditary estates worked by serfs into part of the supply chain for textile mills was attended by – and contributed to – the political ascendancy of capitalists over rentiers.

Now, obviously, capitalism didn't end rents – just as feudalism didn't require the total absence of profits. Under feudalism, capitalists still extracted profits from capital and labor; and under capitalism, rentiers still extracted rents from assets that capitalists and workers paid them to use.

The difference comes in the way that conflicts between profits and rents were resolved. Feudalism is a system where rents triumph over profits, and capitalism is a system where profits triumph over rents.

It's conflict that tells you what really matters. You love your family, but they drive you crazy. If you side with your family over your friends – even when your friends might be right and your family's probably wrong – then you value your family more than your friends. That doesn't mean you don't value your friends – it means that you value them less than your family.

Conflict is a reliable way to know whether or not you're a leftist. As Steven Brust says, the way to distinguish a leftist is to ask "What's more important, human rights, or property rights?" If you answer "Property rights are human right," you're not a leftist. Leftists don't necessarily oppose all property rights – they just think they're less important than human rights.

Think of conflicts between property rights and human rights: the grocer who deliberately renders leftover food inedible before putting it in the dumpster to ensure that hungry people can't eat it, or the landlord who keeps an apartment empty while a homeless person freezes to death on its doorstep. You don't have to say "No one can own food or a home" to say, "in these cases, property rights are interfering with human rights, so they should be overridden." For leftists property rights can be a means to human rights (like revolutionary land reformers who give peasants title to the lands they work), but where property rights interfere with human rights, they are set aside.

In his 2023 book Technofeudalism, Yanis Varoufakis claims that capitalism has given way to a new feudalism – that capitalism was a transitional phase between feudalism…and feudalism:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/28/cloudalists/#cloud-capital

Varoufakis's point isn't that capitalists have gone extinct. Rather, it's that today, conflicts between capital and assets – between rents and profits – reliably end with a victory of rent over profit.

Think of Amazon: the "everything store" appears to be a vast bazaar, a flea-market whose stalls are all operated by independent capitalists who decide what to sell, how to price it, and then compete to tempt shoppers. In reality, though, the whole system is owned by a single feudalist, who extracts 51% from every dollar those merchants take in, and decides who can sell, and what they can sell, and at what price, and whether anyone can even see it:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/01/managerial-discretion/#junk-fees

Or consider the patent trolls of the Eastern District of Texas. These "companies" are invisible and produce nothing. They consist solely of a serviced mailbox in a dusty, uninhabited office-building, and an overbroad patent (say, a patent on "tapping on a screen with your finger") issued by the US Patent and Trademark Office. These companies extract hundreds of millions of dollars from Apple, Google, Samsung for violating these patents. In other words, the government steps in and takes vast profits generated through productive activity by companies that make phones, and turns that money over as rent paid to unproductive companies whose sole "product" is lawsuits. It's the triumph of rent over profit.

Capitalists hate capitalism. All capitalists would rather extract rents than profits, because rents are insulated from competition. The merchants who sell on Jeff Bezos's Amazon (or open a cafe in a landlord's storefront, or license a foolish smartphone patent) bear all the risk. The landlords – of Amazon, the storefront, or the patent – get paid whether or not that risk pays off.

This is why Google, Apple and Samsung also have vast digital estates that they rent out to capitalists – everything from app stores to patent portfolios. They would much rather be in the business of renting things out to capitalists than competing with capitalists.

Hence that famous Adam Smith quote: "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices." This is literally what Google and Meta do:

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

And it's what Apple and Google do:

https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/27/23934961/google-antitrust-trial-defaults-search-deal-26-3-billion

Why compete with one another when you can collude, like feudal lords with adjacent estates who trust one another to return any serf they catch trying to sneak away in the dead of night?

Because of course, it's not just "free markets" that have been captured by rents ("Competition is for losers" -P. Thiel) – it's also "free labor." For years, the largest tech and entertainment companies in America illegally colluded on a "no poach" agreement not to hire one-anothers' employees:

https://techcrunch.com/2015/09/03/apple-google-other-silicon-valley-tech-giants-ordered-to-pay-415m-in-no-poaching-suit/

These companies were bitter competitors – as were these sectors. Even as Big Content was lobbying for farcical copyright law expansions and vowing to capture Big Tech, all these companies on both sides were able to set aside their differences and collude to bind their free workers to their estates and end the "wasteful competition" to secure their labor.

Of course, this is even more pronounced at the bottom of the labor market, where noncompete "agreements" are the norm. The median American worker bound by a noncompete is a fast-food worker whose employer can wield the power of the state to prevent that worker from leaving behind the Wendy's cash-register to make $0.25/hour more at the McDonald's fry trap across the street:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/02/02/its-the-economy-stupid/#neofeudal

Employers defend this as necessary to secure their investment in training their workers and to ensure the integrity of their trade secrets. But why should their investments be protected? Capitalism is about risk, and the fear that accompanies risk – fear that drives capitalists to innovate, which creates the public benefit that is the moral justification for capitalism.

Capitalists hate capitalism. They don't want free labor – they want labor bound to the land. Capitalists benefit from free labor: if you have a better company, you can tempt away the best workers and cause your inferior rival to fail. But feudalists benefit from un-free labor, from tricks like "bondage fees" that force workers to pay in order to quit their jobs:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/21/bondage-fees/#doorman-building

Companies like Petsmart use "training repayment agreement provisions" (TRAPs) to keep low-waged workers from leaving for better employers. Petsmart says it costs $5,500 to train a pet-groomer, and if that worker is fired, laid off, or quits less than two years, they have to pay that amount to Petsmart:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/08/04/its-a-trap/#a-little-on-the-nose

Now, Petsmart is full of shit here. The "four-week training course" Petsmart claims is worth $5,500 actually only lasts for three weeks. What's more, the "training" consists of sweeping the floor and doing other low-level chores for three weeks, without pay.

But even if Petsmart were to give $5,500 worth of training to every pet-groomer, this would still be bullshit. Why should the worker bear the risk of Petsmart making a bad investment in their training? Under capitalism, risks justify rewards. Petsmart's argument for charging $50 to groom your dog and paying the groomer $15 for the job is that they took $35 worth of risk. But some of that risk is being borne by the worker – they're the ones footing the bill for the training.

For Petsmart – as for all feudalists – a worker (with all the attendant risks) can be turned into an asset, something that isn't subject to competition. Petsmart doesn't have to retain workers through superior pay and conditions – they can use the state's contract-enforcement mechanism instead.

Capitalists hate capitalism, but they love feudalism. Sure, they dress this up by claiming that governmental de-risking spurs investment: "Who would pay to train a pet-groomer if that worker could walk out the next day and shave dogs for some competing shop?"

But this is obvious nonsense. Think of Silicon Valley: high tech is the most "IP-intensive" of all industries, the sector that has had to compete most fiercely for skilled labor. And yet, Silicon Valley is in California, where noncompetes are illegal. Every single successful Silicon Valley company has thrived in an environment in which their skilled workers can walk out the door at any time and take a job with a rival company.

There's no indication that the risk of free labor prevents investment. Think of AI, the biggest investment bubble in human history. All the major AI companies are in jurisdictions where noncompetes are illegal. Anthropic – OpenAI's most serious competitor – was founded by a sister/brother team who quit senior roles at OpenAI and founded a direct competitor. No one can claim with a straight face that OpenAI is now unable to raise capital on favorable terms.

What's more, when OpenAI founder Sam Altman was forced out by his board, Microsoft offered to hire him – and 700 other OpenAI personnel – to found an OpenAI competitor. When Altman returned to the company, Microsoft invested more money in OpenAI, despite their intimate understanding that anyone could hire away the company's founder and all of its top technical staff at any time.

The idea that the departure of the Burger King trade secrets locked up in its workers' heads constitute more of a risk to the ability to operate a hamburger restaurant than the departure of the entire technical staff of OpenAI is obvious nonsense. Noncompetes aren't a way to make it possible to run a business – they're a way to make it easy to run a business, by eliminating competition and pushing the risk onto employees.

Because capitalists hate capitalism. And who can blame them? Who wouldn't prefer a life with less risk to one where you have to constantly look over your shoulder for competitors who've found a way to make a superior offer to your customers and workers?

This is why businesses are so excited about securing "IP" – that is, a government-backed right to control your workers, customers, competitors or critics:

https://locusmag.com/2020/09/cory-doctorow-ip/

The argument for every IP right expansion is the same: "Who would invest in creating something new without the assurance that some­one else wouldn’t copy and improve on it and put them out of business?"

That was the argument raised five years ago, during the (mercifully brief) mania for genre writers seeking trademarks on common tropes. There was the romance writer who got a trademark on the word "cocky" in book titles:

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/16/17566276/cockygate-amazon-kindle-unlimited-algorithm-self-published-romance-novel-cabal

And the fantasy writer who wanted a trademark on "dragon slayer" in fantasy novel titles:

https://memex.craphound.com/2018/06/14/son-of-cocky-a-writer-is-trying-to-trademark-dragon-slayer-for-fantasy-novels/

Who subsequently sought a trademark on any book cover featuring a person holding a weapon:

https://memex.craphound.com/2018/07/19/trademark-troll-who-claims-to-own-dragon-slayer-now-wants-exclusive-rights-to-book-covers-where-someone-is-holding-a-weapon/

For these would-be rentiers, the logic was the same: "Why would I write a book about a dragon-slayer if I could lose readers to someone else who writes a book about dragon-slayers?"

In these cases, the USPTO denied or rescinded its trademarks. Profits triumphed over rents. But increasingly, rents are triumphing over profits, and rent-extraction is celebrated as "smart business," while profits are for suckers, only slightly preferable to "wages" (the worst way to get paid under both capitalism and feudalism).

That's what's behind all the talk about "passive income" – that's just a euphemism for "rent." It's what Douglas Rushkoff is referring to in Survival of the Richest when he talks about the wealthy wanting to "go meta":

https://pluralistic.net/2022/09/13/collapse-porn/#collapse-porn

Don't drive a cab – go meta and buy a medallion. Don't buy a medallion, go meta and found Uber. Don't found Uber, go meta and invest in Uber. Don't invest in Uber, go meta and buy options on Uber stock. Don't buy Uber stock options, go meta and buy derivatives of options on Uber stock.

"Going meta" means distancing yourself from capitalism – from income derived from profits, from competition, from risk – and cozying up to feudalism.

Capitalists have always hated capitalism. The owners of the dark Satanic mills wanted peasants turned off the land and converted into "free labor" – but they also kidnapped Napoleonic war-orphans and indentured them to ten-year terms of service, which was all you could get out of a child's body before it was ruined for further work:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/26/enochs-hammer/#thats-fronkonsteen

When Varoufakis says we've entered a new feudal age, he doesn't mean that we've abolished capitalism. He means that – for the first time in centuries – when rents go to war against profits – the rents almost always emerge victorious.

Here's the podcast episode:

https://craphound.com/news/2024/04/14/capitalists-hate-capitalism/

Here's a direct link to the MP3 (hosting courtesy of the Internet Archive; they'll host your stuff for free, forever):

https://archive.org/download/Cory_Doctorow_Podcast_465/Cory_Doctorow_Podcast_465_-_Capitalists_Hate_Capitalism.mp3

And here's the RSS feed for my podcast:

http://feeds.feedburner.com/doctorow_podcast

---

Hey look at this (permalink)

• The town of ormož and its surroundings by Kate Wagner https://katewagner.neocities.org/ss/p/kate%20wagner%20the%20town%20of%20ormoz%CC%8C%20and%20its%20surroundings%20[final].pdf (h/t Super Punch)

• Phenomenal Katrina Christiansen campaign video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I44L1pzi4gk (h/t @bdgordon)

• The Life and Death of Hollywood https://harpers.org/archive/2024/05/the-life-and-death-of-hollywood-daniel-bessner/

---

This day in history (permalink)

#20yrsago Prison wipes creative-writing class HDDs after student wins PEN award https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2005/feb/15/connecticut-prison-writers-settle-lawsuit-writing-program-reinstated/

#20yrsago EFF waging war on bullshit Internet patents https://web.archive.org/web/20040507111819/https://www.eff.org/Patent/20040419_eff_pr_patent.php

#20yrsago Brazil cracks down on sat-hackers who bounce ham signals off US military satellites https://www.wired.com/2009/04/fleetcom/

#15yrsago Clement Freud’s funniest joke https://britrish.com/2011/08/10/sir-clement-freud-and-the-funniest-joke-ever-told/

#15yrsago RIP, JG Ballard http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8007331.stm

#15yrsago CIA waterboarded individual suspects up to 183 times https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/apr/20/waterboarding-alqaida-khalid-sheikh-mohammed

#10yrsago Profile of Aeropress and Aerobie inventor Alan Adler https://priceonomics.com/the-invention-of-the-aeropress/

#10yrsago UK tax authority caught sneaking in plan to sell Britons’ private financial records https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/18/hmrc-to-sell-taxpayers-data

#5yrsago AOC is going to Kentucky https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/19/politics/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-kentucky-visit/index.html

#5yrsago TSA admits that its pornoscanners flag Black women and others with curly hair for humiliating, invasive searches https://www.propublica.org/article/tsa-not-discriminating-against-black-women-but-their-body-scanners-might-be

#5yrsago NYC adopts law targeting the handful of skyscrapers that are spiking the city’s carbon footprint https://www.wired.com/story/new-yorks-aggressive-climate-law-takes-aim-at-skyscrapers/

#5yrsago Read the source code for every classic Infocom text-adventure game! https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/04/you-can-now-download-the-source-code-for-all-infocom-text-adventure-classics/

#5yrsago Telcoms lobbyists have convinced 26 states to ban or restrict municipal broadband https://www.vice.com/en/article/kzmana/report-26-states-now-ban-or-restrict-community-broadband

#5yrsago IPOs have sent Uber and Lyft fares skyrocketing, while driver pay plummets https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/apr/18/uber-lyft-drivers-surge-pricing-wages

#1yrago Iowa's starvation strategy https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/19/whats-wrong-with-iowa/#replicable-cruelty

---

Upcoming appearances (permalink)

• Torino Biennale Tecnologia, Apr 21
  https://www.turismotorino.org/en/experiences/events/biennale-tecnologia

• The Bezzle at Book Passage Corte Madera (Marin County), April 27
  https://www.bookpassage.com/event/cory-doctorow-bezzle-martin-hench-novel-corte-madera-store

• Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (Winnipeg), May 2
  https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/cory-doctorow-tickets-798820071337

• Wordfest (Calgary), May 3
  https://wordfest.com/2024/event/wordfest-presents-cory-doctorow-2/

• Massy Arts (Vancouver), May 4
  https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/solo-reading-cory-doctorow-the-bezzle-tickets-876989167207

• Tartu Prima Vista Literary Festival, May 5-11
  https://tartu2024.ee/en/kirjandusfestival/

• Tim O’Reilly and Cory Doctorow on “Enshittification” and the Future of AI, May 14
  https://www.oreilly.com/live-events/tim-oreilly-and-cory-doctorow-on-enshittification-and-the-future-of-ai/0642572001651/

• "Finding the Money" screening (LA), May 15
  https://www.laemmle.com/film/finding-money?date=2024-05-15

• Media Ecology Association keynote (Amherst, NY), Jun 6-9
  https://media-ecology.org/convention

• American Association of Law Libraries keynote (Chicago), Jul 21
  https://www.aallnet.org/conference/agenda/keynote-speaker/

---

Recent appearances (permalink)

• How is life becoming “enshitified"? (Open To Debate)
  https://soundcloud.com/canada2020/open-to-debate-how-is-life-becoming-enshitified?in=canada2020/sets/open-to-debate-with-david

• Cory Doctorow & Randall Munroe (Harvard Berkman-Klein Center)
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulnlSRbH80Y

• Deep Dive podcast
  https://open.spotify.com/episode/0bS0DS1H7ghHkiyx4KzXBV?si=fe7242019e734d61

---

Latest books (permalink)

• The Bezzle: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about prison-tech and other grifts, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), February 2024 (the-bezzle.org). Signed, personalized copies at Dark Delicacies (https://www.darkdel.com/store/p3062/Available_Feb_20th%3A_The_Bezzle_HB.html#/).

• "The Lost Cause:" a solarpunk novel of hope in the climate emergency, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), November 2023 (http://lost-cause.org). Signed, personalized copies at Dark Delicacies (https://www.darkdel.com/store/p3007/Pre-Order_Signed_Copies%3A_The_Lost_Cause_HB.html#/)

• "The Internet Con": A nonfiction book about interoperability and Big Tech (Verso) September 2023 (http://seizethemeansofcomputation.org). Signed copies at Book Soup (https://www.booksoup.com/book/9781804291245).

• "Red Team Blues": "A grabby, compulsive thriller that will leave you knowing more about how the world works than you did before." Tor Books http://redteamblues.com. Signed copies at Dark Delicacies (US): and Forbidden Planet (UK): https://forbiddenplanet.com/385004-red-team-blues-signed-edition-hardcover/.

• "Chokepoint Capitalism: How to Beat Big Tech, Tame Big Content, and Get Artists Paid, with Rebecca Giblin", on how to unrig the markets for creative labor, Beacon Press/Scribe 2022 https://chokepointcapitalism.com

• "Attack Surface": The third Little Brother novel, a standalone technothriller for adults. The Washington Post called it "a political cyberthriller, vigorous, bold and savvy about the limits of revolution and resistance." Order signed, personalized copies from Dark Delicacies https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1840/Available_Now%3A_Attack_Surface.html

• "How to Destroy Surveillance Capitalism": an anti-monopoly pamphlet analyzing the true harms of surveillance capitalism and proposing a solution. https://onezero.medium.com/how-to-destroy-surveillance-capitalism-8135e6744d59?sk=f6cd10e54e20a07d4c6d0f3ac011af6b) (signed copies: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2024/Available_Now%3A__How_to_Destroy_Surveillance_Capitalism.html)

• "Little Brother/Homeland": A reissue omnibus edition with a new introduction by Edward Snowden: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250774583; personalized/signed copies here: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1750/July%3A__Little_Brother_%26_Homeland.html

• "Poesy the Monster Slayer" a picture book about monsters, bedtime, gender, and kicking ass. Order here: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781626723627. Get a personalized, signed copy here: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2682/Corey_Doctorow%3A_Poesy_the_Monster_Slayer_HB.html#/.

---

Upcoming books (permalink)

• Picks and Shovels: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about the heroic era of the PC, Tor Books, February 2025

• Unauthorized Bread: a graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, 2025

---

Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing:

• A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING

• Picks and Shovels, a Martin Hench noir thriller about the heroic era of the PC. FORTHCOMING TOR BOOKS JAN 2025

• Vigilant, Little Brother short story about remote invigilation. FORTHCOMING ON TOR.COM

• Spill, a Little Brother short story about pipeline protests. FORTHCOMING ON TOR.COM

Latest podcast: Capitalists Hate Capitalism https://craphound.com/news/2024/04/14/capitalists-hate-capitalism/

---

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

Too often have I witnessed the improvising musician sweaty-handedly attempting to pinch-zoom an A4 pdf on a tiny mobile screen at the climax of a gig. We need fluid and responsive music rendering for the web!

Roll7 and Intercept Games to be shuttered amid layoffs

Continue reading…