L’Église Saint-Nicolas, Heremence, Switzerland. Designed by Walter Maria Förderer, constructed 1967-1971. All photos © Jamie McGregor Smith, courtesy of Hatje Cantz, shared with permission

In the mid-20th century, a bold, angular architectural style emerged as a celebration of post-war renewal, innovation, and symbolic strength. Brutalism, known for its bare, monochrome, industrial materials like concrete, brick, and steel, became a way for centers of influence like municipal hubs, government buildings, and cultural institutions to convey magnificent resilience and contemporaneity. Religious architecture was no exception.

There is hardly a more symbolic building than a church or cathedral, from the pilgrimage-like progression down the nave toward the altar to the lofty height and sweeping arches that draw the eye upward as a metaphorical connection to Heaven. And starting the 1960s, architects began designing cavernous brutalist buildings to house congregations around Europe, taking ecclesiastical structures in remarkable new directions.

In his new book Sacred Modernity, photographer Jamie McGregor Smith explores Europe’s most stunning brutalist churches, capturing cavernous meeting halls, remarkable geometry, and characteristic concrete and brick textures. Published by Hatje Cantz, the volume traces the dramatic, modernizing shift, marked by the Vatican’s search for an appropriate stylistic language to show that the Catholic Church was still relevant in contemporary society.

St. Paulus Kirche, Weckhoven, Dussoldorf, Germany. Designed by Fritz Schaller and Stefan Polónyi, constructed 1966-1970

Smith has long been captivated by industrial and urban design. Inspired by the New Topographics documentary photography movement in the U.S., he began focusing on the defunct pottery industry in the British Midlands and iron ore processing plants in Middlesbrough. When he moved from London to Vienna in the summer of 2018, he was immediately struck by a seeming paradox when he visited an impressively blocky, asymmetrical church in the district of Liesing. He says:

The concept for the church began life as a sculpture, the artist believing its design had been delivered to him by God in a dream. I was bewildered that this piece of progressive art, consisting of 152 irregular concrete blocks, had been commissioned by such a conservative institution. It redefined my idea of what a church could be: at once beautiful yet brutal.

Smith broadened his search and quickly became enthralled by the forward-thinking movement in sacred design, spurring a series that aims to collate the religious architecture of mid-century high modernity. At more than 200 pages with well over 100 photographs, the new volume catalogues locations across the continent, highlighting the distinctive use of cast concrete, light-catching facets, and monumental proportions.

Sacred Modernity is scheduled for release in the U.S. on May 14, and you can preorder a copy now on Bookshop. Find more on the artist’s website and Instagram.

Christi Auferstehung Kirche, Cologne, Germany. Designed by Gottfried Böhm, constructed 1968-1970

Interior of Christi Auferstehung Kirche, Cologne, Germany

Heilig-Kreuz-Kirche, Vienna, Austria. Designed by Hannes Lintl, constructed 1971-1975

Chiesa di Santa Maria Immacolata, Longarone, Italy. Designed by Giovanni Michelucci, constructed 1975-1977

Osterkirche, Oberwart, Austria. Designed by Gunther Domenig and Eilfried Huth, constructed 1967-1969

Kościół św, Dominika, Poland. Designed by Władysław Pieńkowski, constructed 1985-1994

St Theresia Kirche, Linz, Austria. Designed by Rudolf Schwarz, constructed 1959-1962

Santuario della Beata Vergine della Consolazione, San Marino. Designed by Giovanni Michelucci, constructed 1964-1967 

Do stories and artists like this matter to you? Become a Colossal Member today and support independent arts publishing for as little as $5 per month. The article Jamie McGregor Smith Illuminates Europe’s Most Striking Brutalist Churches in ‘Sacred Modernity’ appeared first on Colossal.

Enlarge / Night view of company logos in Nestlé Avanca Dairy Products Plant on January 21, 2019, in Avanca, Portugal. This plant produces Cerelac, Nestum, Mokambo, Pensal, Chocapic and Estrelitas, among others. (credit: Getty | Horacio Villalobos)

In high-income countries, Nestlé brand baby foods have no added sugars them, in line with recommendations from major health organizations around the world and consumer pressure. But in low- and middle-income countries, Nestlé adds sugar to those same baby products, sometimes at high levels, which could lead children to prefer sugary diets and unhealthy eating habits, according to an investigation released recently by nonprofit groups.

The investigation, conducted by Public Eye and the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN), says the addition of added sugars to baby foods in poorer countries, against expert recommendations, creates an "unjustifiable double standard." The groups quote Rodrigo Vianna, an epidemiologist and professor at the Department of Nutrition of the Federal University of Paraíba in Brazil, who calls added sugars in baby foods "unnecessary and highly addictive."

"Children get used to the sweet taste and start looking for more sugary foods, starting a negative cycle that increases the risk of nutrition-based disorders in adult life," Vianna told the organizations for their investigation. "These include obesity and other chronic non-communicable diseases, such as diabetes or high blood-pressure."

The two groups compared the nutritional content of Nestlé's Cerelac and Nido products, the company's best-selling baby food brands in low- and middle-income countries that generate sales of over $2.5 billion. In a Cerelac wheat cereal product, for instance, the product contained up to 6 grams of added sugar in countries including Thailand, Ethiopia, South Africa, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. In the United Kingdom and Germany, the same product contained zero added sugars.

The product with the highest sugar content was a Cerelac baby cereal product sold in the Philippines with 7.3 grams of sugar. While children under age 2 are recommended to have zero grams of added sugars in their diet, for reference, children aged 2 to 18 are recommended to have less than 25 grams (about six teaspoons) per day by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

In the Philippines, where the sugar content was the highest, and in other countries—including Nigeria, Senegal, Vietnam and Pakistan—the added sugar content was not listed on Nestlé's labeling, the investigation found.

Double standard

"There is a double standard here that can’t be justified,” Nigel Rollins, a WHO scientist, told the nonprofit groups. Rollins pointed out that the company does not add sugars to its baby products in Switzerland, where the company is headquartered. Thus, continuing to add it in low-resource settings is "problematic both from a public health and ethical perspective," he said.

In a report last month, the WHO found that as of 2022, 37 million children under the age of 5 worldwide had overweight. Additionally, over 390 million children ages 5 to 19 had overweight and 160 million had obesity. The prevalence of overweight in children 5 to 19 rose from 8 percent in 1990 to 20 percent in 2022, the United Nations agency noted. Obesity rates in this age group, meanwhile, rose from 2 percent to 8 percent in the same timespan.

Nestlé responded to the investigation with a statement suggesting that the differences in sugar content "depend on several factors, including regulations and availability of local ingredients, which can result in offerings with lower or no-added sugars." But it argued that these differences do not "compromise the nutritional value of our products for infants and young children."

Nestlé is a multinational food and drink behemoth with a controversial history of selling baby products in poorer countries. In the 1970s and '80s, the company came under heavy international fire for aggressively marketing its baby formula to impoverished mothers. Health advocates accused Nestlé of misleading mothers into thinking formula is better than breast milk for their babies, even though leading health organizations recommend exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life when possible.

Critics accused Nestlé of providing free formula to hospital maternity wards, causing new, low-income mothers to turn to it shortly after birth in the critical window in which breast milk production would otherwise ramp up in response to nursing a newborn. Without nursing in that time, mothers can struggle to lactate and become dependent on formula. Out of the hospital, the powdered formula is no longer free and must be mixed in proper amounts and in sanitary conditions to ensure it is safe and meeting the nutritional needs of the infant, which can be a struggle for poor families.

Nestlé now states that it follows international standards for marketing breast-milk substitutes, despite ongoing boycotts in some countries.

Read Comments

I’m not always sure how to handle things when some sort of social media something that involves cars goes viral. Sometimes, we just want to ignore it, but then again, our goal is to bring top-notch Brougham-grade quality automotive content to as many people as possible, even if those people didn’t realize how much they were craving and needing said car content. So, when something goes big and has a significant automotive angle, why not try to address it? So that’s what we’re doing now, as I invite you to join me in marveling at a TikTok video created by a person who slowly and destructively sideswiped a parking bollard, causing $30,000 worth of body damage to her new Cadillac Escalade. Over 3.7 million people watched this video, enrapt at a human being blaming an inert metal bollard that is sunk into the ground with concrete for being at fault in a wreck.

I wish I could definitively state why this video has captured the attention of so many; there’s some obvious things, of course. The person making it is conventionally attractive, there’s the undeniable draw of some nice, juicy schadenfreude, and it’s talking about something deeply familiar and relatable to many people: the fact that parking bollards exist. Beyond that I can’t really say, other than there really is something fascinating about watching someone in such complete denial about an event that happened.

The someone we’re talking about, by the way, is a – I guess you’d call them an influencer?– on social media, named Natalie Vacca, with over 270,000 followers on TikTok, and mostly seems to post videos of herself talking about stuff to the camera, with occasional cameos from dogs and kids. Looking at the environment and materials and locations of these videos, this person seems to be doing just fine, financially. They seem to be living a pretty cushy life, and part of that seems to include a recent-model Cadillac Escalade, which plays a crucial role in the video, which, here, you may as well just watch already:

@nat.vacca

I cant be the only victim to yellow bank polls. #escalade #cadillac #autobody #crunch #matteblack #banks #cement #damage

♬ Whats the purpose – Tash

I’m sure there’s like half a dozen things that you saw just now that are making you want to scream: someone not understanding the purpose of those bollards, saying “look what your metal pole did to my car” and then stating they don’t think it was their fault, and then calling a door handle a “handlebar” and saying “you hear a crunch and freeze, and then you keep going,” all of this, all of this, it almost feels like too much. Is it an act? Can this be serious? Are there people so clueless about the way Earth works that they believe all these things? And are allowed to drive a 5,600-pound SUV like an Escalade?

Of course, the comments are absolutely brutal. But it, somehow, gets even better, because ol’ Nat posted a response video where, bafflingly, she pretended to not be herself, and instead did the video as some other person “playing devil’s advocate about hitting bank poles” as though there’s two powerful and equal sides to the “should you grind your car into yellow parking bollards, causing lots of damage?” debate. Here, you have to watch this one, so you can enjoy that strangely satisfying feeling of wanting to scream about dumb things, yet again:

@nat.vacca

Im just playing devils advocate #bollard #atm #followup #devilsadvocate #stlouis #escalade #cadillac #autobody #crunch #handlebar #satire

♬ original sound – Tash

First of all, what the hell is the point of doing a response video as though you’re someone who is not you, but is also very clearly you? It feels absolutely unhinged. Why would you choose this? For objectivity? I don’t think objectivity works that way. I don’t think anything works that way?

The part where she’s defending the her-but-not-her for continuing to drive forward after hearing the crunch is particularly maddening. She notes, quite correctly, that her shifter only offers options for forward or reverse travel, and no sideways control. This checks out, because her Escalade (and most other automobiles made for the past century or so) have their “sideways” controls in the form of the fucking steering wheel, a cool little driving hack you in-the-know drivers should be aware of.

Of course, this was noted multiple times in the comments:

Plus, this one gets in the extra little dig with “wheelbar!” Gold! brutal, funny gold!

Look, just in general, I would have thought that most people, upon driving and hearing a loud crunching sound, would know to just stop, and ideally get out of the car and see what the hell is going on. Moving in the direction of travel you were going in when you hit the whatever, especially when you can still hear the sounds of bending metal, is generally a bad idea, at least if your goal is to have less damage to your car.

There’s any number of ways she could have slowly and carefully backed away from the bollard, ideally utilizing some of that “sideways” control offered by the steering wheel, to minimize the damage, instead of raking the entire length of the side of the car against the bollard.

Then there’s the suggestion that, somehow, if these were red instead of yellow, they’d be much better? Was the color what confused her? It seems more like she didn’t see them at all, but if she saw them, saw that they were yellow and thought “Oh! yellow poles! There’s no way a yellow pole could cause any harm! Yellow is the color of bananas and twinkies, nature’s softest elements, so this yellow pole must be quite similar, quite similar indeed!”

Can this all be real? Is this person just trolling for engagement? Is it all a setup, designed to stir click-worthy and monetizible wrath in the minds of people? Is it just fuel for some misogynist’s future, mis-informed screed about gender and driving? Because I don’t want to hear that shit.

I mean, look, we’ve all fucked up while driving. An Escalade is huge and the visibility isn’t that great; I’m not necessarily immune from a similar sort of fuck-up. The actual driving into the bollard isn’t the issue. It’s the making the video about it, with the determined confidence of idiocy, but, then again, making these videos is what this woman does. Her life is content, and this is definitely content. I’m not so different, just, you know, homelier and drive much cheaper cars. If I did this, the only way I could cause $30,000 worth of damage is if I shredded $24,000 in cash against the bollard in the process.

I think this is real, at least in the sense that the event happened, and her reactions are real. But she’s also likely very aware of the engagement and reaction this will have.

But, here I am, talking about it. To you! Matt told me to, but I agreed without protest because I saw the damn videos and was as baffled and captivated as anyone. What does this say about us, all of us? I mean, there’s her, with these baffling decisions and what seems to be as many qualifications to drive an Escalade as your average land-squirrel, and then there’s me, watching it over and over and wondering how this can be and playing right smack dab into the whole internet economy of cultivated outrage.

But still, let’s recap: bollards are there to keep people from driving their Escalades into expensive buildings or over expensive people. If you hear a crunch while slowly driving in a parking lot just stop. See what’s going on before continuing to drive. And, yes, if you hit an inert, immobile object like a bollard or an obelisk or a tree stump, it is definitely, unquestionably your fault.

This Photo Of A Car Crashed Perfectly Into A Driving School Under A ‘Learn To Drive’ Sign Gets Better When You Find Out Who The Driver Was

The Car Crashes From The ’70s TV Show ‘CHiPS’ Are Dazzling Dances Of Car Chaos

That Viral Tweet About Truck Bed Sizes Over The Years Is Just Stupid

I Can’t Stop Watching This Driver Get Their Car Absolutely Wedged In A Sinkhole

The post ‘I Don’t Think It’s My Fault’ Says Person Who Somehow Did $30k Worth Of Damage In A Single-Car, Low-Speed Parking Lot Accident appeared first on The Autopian.

Today's links

• Paying for it doesn't make it a market: But competition does.
• Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
• This day in history: 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.

Paying for it doesn't make it a market (permalink)

Anyone who says "If you're not paying for the product, you're the product" has been suckered in by Big Tech and their cargo-cult version of markets and the discipline they impose on companies.

Here's the way that story goes: companies that fear losing your business will treat you better, because treating you worse will cost them money. Since ad-supported media gets paid by advertisers, they are fine with abusing you to make advertisers happy, because the advertiser is the customer, and you are the product.

This represents a profound misunderstanding of how even capitalism's champions describe its workings. The purported virtue of capitalism is that it transforms the capitalist's greed into something of broad public value, by appealing to the capitalist's fear. A successful capitalist isn't merely someone figures out how to please their customers – they're also someone who figures out how to please their suppliers.

That's why tech platforms were – until recently – very good to (some of) their workforce. Technical labor was scarce and so platforms built whimsical "campuses" for tech workers, with amenities ranging from stock options to gourmet cafeterias to egg-freezing services for those workers planning to stay at their desks through their fertile years. Those workers weren't the "customer" – but they were treated better than any advertiser or user.

But when it came to easily replaced labor – testers, cleaning crew, the staff in those fancy cafeterias – the situation was much worse. Those workers were hired through cut-out shell companies, denied benefits, even made to enter via separate entrances on shifts that were scheduled to minimize the chance that they would ever interact with one of the highly paid tech workers at the firm.

Likewise, advertisers may be the tech companies' "customers" but that doesn't mean the platforms treat them well. Advertisers get ripped off just like the rest of us. The platforms gouge them on price, lie to them about advertising reach, and collude with one another to fix prices and defraud advertisers:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/10/05/florida-man/#wannamakers-ghost

Now, it's true that the advertisers used to get a good deal from the platforms, and that it came at the expense of the users. Facebook lured in users by falsely promising never to spy on them. Then, once the users were locked in, Facebook flipped a switch, started spying on users from asshole to appetite, and then offered rock-bottom-priced, fine-grained, highly reliable ad-targeting to advertisers:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3247362

But once those advertisers were locked in, Facebook turned on them, too. Of course they did. The point of monopoly power isn't just getting too big to fail and too big to jail – it's getting too big to care:

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

This is the thing that "if you're not paying for the product, you're the product" fails to comprehend. "If you're not paying for the product" is grounded in a cartoonish vision of markets in which "the customer is king" and successful businesses are those who cater to their customers – even at the expense of their workers and suppliers – will succeed.

In this frame, the advertiser is the platforms' customer, the customer is king, the platform inflicts unlimited harm upon all other stakeholders in service to those advertisers, the advertisers are so pleased with this white-glove service that they willingly pay a handsome premium to use the platform, and so the platform grows unimaginably wealthy.

But of course, if the platforms inflict unlimited harms upon their users, those users will depart, and then no amount of obsequious catering to advertisers will convince them to spend money on ads that no one sees. In the cargo-cult conception of platform capitalism, the platforms are able to solve this problem by "hacking our dopamine loops" – depriving us of our free will with "addictive" technologies that keep us locked to their platforms even when they grow so terrible that we all hate using them.

This means that we can divide the platform economy into "capitalists" who sell you things, and "surveillance capitalists" who use surveillance data to control your mind, then sell your compulsive use of their products to their cherished customers, the advertisers.

Under this theory, "surveillance capitalists" like Google are thus said to have only been shamming when they offered us a high-quality product. That was just a means to an end: the good service Google offered in its golden age was just bait to trick us into handing over enough surveillance data that they could tune their mind-control technology, strip us of our free will, and then sell us to their beloved advertisers, for whom nothing is too good.

Meanwhile, the traditional capitalists – the companies that sell you things – are the good capitalists. Apple and Microsoft are disciplined by market dynamics. They won't spy on you because you're their customer, and so they have to keep you happy.

All this leads to an inexorable conclusion: unless we pay for things with money, we are doomed. Any attempt to pay with attention will end in a free-for-all where the platforms use their Big Data mind-control rays to drain us of all our attention. It is only when we pay with money that we can dicker over price and arrive at a fair and freely chosen offer.

This theory is great for tech companies: it elevates giving them money to a democracy-preserving virtue. It reframes handing your cash over to a multi-trillion dollar tech monopolist as good civics. It's easy to see why those tech giants would like that story, but boy, are you a sap if you buy it.

Because all capitalists are surveillance capitalists…when they can get away with it. Sure, Apple blocked Facebook from spying on Ios users…and then started illegally, secretly spying on those users and lying about it, in order to target ads to those users:

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

And Microsoft spies on every Office 365 user and rats them out to their bosses ("Marge, this analytics dashboard says you're the division's eleventh-worst speller and twelfth-worst typist. Shape up or ship out!"). But the joke's on your boss: Microsoft also spies on their whole company and sells the data about it to their competitors:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/11/25/the-peoples-amazon/#clippys-revengel

The platforms screw anyone they can. Sure, they lured in advertisers with good treatment, but once those advertisers were locked in, they fucked them over just as surely as they fucked over their users.

The surveillance capitalism hypothesis depends on the existence of a hypothetical – and wildly improbable – Big Data mind-control technology that keeps users locked to platforms even when the platform decays. Mind-control rays are an extraordinary claim supported by the thinnest of evidence (marketing materials from the companies as they seek to justify charging a premium to advertisers, combined with the self-serving humblebrags of millionaire Prodigal Tech Bros who claim to have awakened to the evil of using their dopamine-hacking sorcerous powers on behalf of their billionaire employers).

There is a much simpler explanation for why users stay on platforms even as they decline in quality: they are enmeshed in a social service that encompasses their friends, loved ones, customers, and communities. Even if everyone in this sprawling set of interlocking communities agrees that the platform is terrible, they will struggle to agree on what to do about it: where to go next and when to leave. This is the economists' "collective action problem" – a phenomenon with a much better evidentiary basis than the hypothetical, far-fetched "dopamine loop" theory.

To understand whom a platform treats well and whom it abuses, look not to who pays it and who doesn't. Instead, ask yourself: who does the platform have locked in? The more any stakeholder to a platform stands to lose by leaving, the worse the platform can treat them without risking their departure. Thus the beneficent face that tech companies turn to their most cherished tech workers, and the hierarchy of progressively more-abusive conditions for other workers – worse treatment for those whose work-visas are tied to their employment, and the very worst treatment for contractors testing the code, writing the documentation, labelling the data or cleaning the toilets.

If you care about how people are treated by platforms, you can't just tell them to pay for services instead of using ad-supported media. The most important factor in getting decent treatment out of a tech company isn't whether you pay with cash instead of attention – it's whether you're locked in, and thus a flight risk whom the platform must cater to.

It's perfectly possible for market dynamics to play out in a system in which we pay with our attention by watching ads. More than 50% of all web users have installed an ad-blocker, the largest boycott in the history of civilization:

https://doc.searls.com/2023/11/11/how-is-the-worlds-biggest-boycott-doing/

Ad-supported companies make an offer: How about in exchange for looking at this content, you let us spy on you in ways that would make Orwell blush and then cram a torrent of targeted ads into your eyeballs?" Ad-blockers let you make a counter-offer: "How about 'nah'?"

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

But ad-blocking is only possible on an open platform. A closed, locked-down platform that is illegal to modify isn't a walled garden, a fortress that keeps out the bad guys – it's a walled prison that locks you in, a prisoner of the worst impulses of the tech giant that built it. Apple can defend you from other companies' spying ways, but when Apple decides to spy on you, it's a felony to jailbreak your Iphone and block Apple's surveillance:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/05/battery-vampire/#drained

I am no true believer in markets – but the people who say that paying for products will "align incentives" and make tech better claim to believe in the power of markets to make everyone better off. In fact, real markets aren't just places where companies sell things – they're also places where companies buy things. We know how monopolies short-circuit the power of customer choice to force companies to do better. But monopsonies – markets dominated by powerful buyers – are just as poisonous to the claimed benefits of markets.

Even if you are "the product" – that is, even if you're selling your attention to a platform that packages it up and sells it to an advertiser – that need not preclude your getting decent treatment from the platform. A world where we can avail ourselves of blockers, where interoperablity eases our exodus from abusive platforms, where privacy law sets a floor below which we cannot bargain is a world where it doesn't matter if you're "the product" or "the customer" – you can still get a square deal.

The platforms used to treat us well and now treat us badly. That's not because they were setting a patient trap, luring us in with good treatment in the expectation of locking us in and turning on us. Tech bosses do not have the executive function to lie in wait for years and years.

Rather, as tech platforms eliminated competition, captured their regulators and expanded their IP rights so that interoperability was no longer a threat, they became too big to care whether any of their stakeholders were happy. First they came for the users, sure, but then they turned on the publishers, the advertisers, and finally, even their once-pampered tech workers:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/10/the-proletarianization-of-tech-workers/

MLK said that "the law can't make a man love me, but it can stop him from lynching me." It's impossible to get tech bosses to believe you deserve care and decency, but you can stop them from abusing you. The way to do that is by making them fear you – by abolishing the laws that create lock-in, by legally enshrining a right to privacy, by protecting competition.

It's not by giving them money. Paying for a service does not make a company fear you, and anyone who thinks they can buy a platform's loyalty by paying for a service is a simp. A corporation is an immortal, transhuman colony organism that uses us as inconvenient gut-flora: no matter how much you love it, it will never love you back. It can't experience love – only fear.

Hey look at this (permalink)

This day in history (permalink)

#20yrsago Bill O’Reilly mistakes Globe and Mail for Socialist Worker https://web.archive.org/web/20040426005411/http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040421/DOYLE21/TPColumnists/

#20yrsago Silmarillion in 1,000 words https://web.archive.org/web/20060427200009/https://camwyn.livejournal.com/328358.html

#20yrsago London: The (Magnificent) Biography https://memex.craphound.com/2004/04/22/london-the-magnificent-biography/

#15yrsago UAE royal caught torturing man on video https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=7402099

#15yrsago Joe Biden promises a blank check to the entertainment cartel https://web.archive.org/web/20110624055700/http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10224689-38.html

#15yrsago Entertainment industry’s greedy lobbying is their undoing https://web.archive.org/web/20090425083430/http://www.internetevolution.com/document.asp?doc_id=175415&

#15yrsago JG Ballard eulogized by John Clute https://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/j-g-ballard-writer-whose-dystopian-visions-helped-shape-our-view-of-the-modern-world-1671634.html

#10yrsago Appeals court orders Obama administration to disclose the legal theory for assassination of Americans https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/obama-ordered-to-divulge-legal-basis-for-killing-americans-with-drones/

#10yrsago Shakespeare’s Beehive: analysis of newly discovered dictionary that Shakespeare owned and annotated https://endlessbookshelf.net/beehive.html

#10yrsago Reddit’s /r/technology demoted over scandal of secret censorship that blocked Internet freedom stories https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27100773

#5yrsago Facebook has hired the Patriot Act’s co-author and “day-to-day manager” to be its new general counsel https://thehill.com/policy/technology/440085-facebook-taps-lawyer-who-helped-write-patriot-act/

#5yrsago Google walkout organizers say they’re being retaliated against for demanding ethical standards https://www.wired.com/story/google-walkout-organizers-say-theyre-facing-retaliation/

#5yrsago Elizabeth Warren’s latest proposal: cancel student debt, make college free https://medium.com/@teamwarren/im-calling-for-something-truly-transformational-universal-free-public-college-and-cancellation-of-a246cd0f910f

#5yrsago Heiress “Instagram influencer” whose parents are accused of paying a $500K bribe to get her into USC has trademark application rejected for punctuation errors https://www.huffpost.com/entry/olivia-jade-trademark-punctuation_n_5c9c8f16e4b07c8866313c5e?ncid=newsltushpmgnews__TheMorningEmail__032919

#5yrsago Zuck turned American classrooms into nonconsensual laboratories for his pet educational theories, and now they’re rebelling https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/21/technology/silicon-valley-kansas-schools.html

#5yrsago Platform cooperativism (or, how to turn gig-economy jobs into $22.25/hour jobs) https://www.wired.com/story/when-workers-control-gig-economy/

#5yrsago A secret Finnish subculture of women and girls who ride hobbyhorses has come out of the shadows https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imW7EGQcJck

#5yrsago Most Republican voters were Trumpists before Trump, and most of the rest have converted since 2016 https://crookedtimber.org/2019/04/21/transactional-trumpism/

#5yrsago Stop & Shop strike convinces 75% of loyal customers to take business elsewhere https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2019/04/19/visits-loyal-stop-shop-customers-decline-during-strike/aGr2bUg75Mbu3zY0y5YZiI/story.html

#5yrsago After Notre Dame bailout Yellow Vests urge more Victor Hugo tributes, starting with “Les Miserables” https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/04/20/yellow-vests-demonstrate-paris-notre-dame-donations-highlight-wealth-inequality

#1yrago How workers get trapped by "bondage fees" https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/21/bondage-fees/#doorman-building

Upcoming appearances (permalink)

• 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)

• Show Me The Money Club (The Rideshare Guy)
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCETi3XqSds

• NUOVO BARETTO UTOPIA
  https://videoteca.kenobit.it/w/azRmQBCenVwjSRz9WCp8JS

• 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

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

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.