Deep Thoughts & Random Bullshit

Being a slow dance of the infinite stars

[bardraelyn]

Good Omens: A Complete Timeline with Historical Events and Annotations

Need a definitive, annotated timeline for reference when writing canon-compliant fanfics? Look no further!

Highly detailed and color-coded, with links to relevant articles, Wikipedia pages, and author comments on Tumblr.

[allonsybadwolf]

"crochet can't be made by machines" went from being a cool fun fact to being a call to action of "so if you see mass manufactured crochet in Target, that was made by a person and they were underpaid and you should boycott it" which is true, it was made by a person, but EVERY item of clothing you own (that you did not purchase from a company using ethical labor) was made by a person being underpaid (at *best*.)

Sewing machines are operated by *people*. Knitting machines are operated by *people*. Yes lots of the process is automated but you cannot tell a machine "make me a t-shirt" or "make me a knit cardigan".

Higher awareness of fast fashion, and the true human labor and abuse behind it, is GREAT, but let's not pretend that the crochet hat in target is THE problem. Every article of clothing in target is the problem. "All clothes are made by people" is the jumping off point here into understanding this issue it's not just crochet it's the whole thing ahhhhHHHHHHHHHH

[enerdsout]

[plantanarchy]

still fuckin hate that “bee-free honey” that’s made from……… apples. bitch who you think sexed up those apples

[nihilistwife]

A farmer, by hand and with love and care

[plantanarchy]

wild bees still sexin em up when he’s not looking

[nihilistwife]

old mccuckhold had a farm it seems

[belleyells]

Comment ideas for ppl who have trouble of thinking what to say (some are more unhinged than others) (yes you can use these)

Kudos!!

Reread and still loved!

This was my bedtime story tonight! <3

CAN YOU HEAR ME SCREAMING

Cryin in the club rn

I love how you write [CHARACTER]!

PTERODACTYL SCREECHING

This was great! My fav line was [insert line here] <3

😎🤏 😮🕶️🤏 holy shit

Can you hear that? It’s the sound of my heart shattering into a thousand tiny pieces

Kudos, bookmarked, printed and framed and hung on my wall

This was so fluffy I’m gonna need a dentist

[ri5k]

the replacement of websites with apps sounds so backwards when you actually describe it. like hmm you have to download an entire program onto your device each time you want access to a portal, where it takes up storage indefinitely. somebody should invent an app where you can "browse" any portal just by typing in its address... 🥴

[iesika]

“Pratchett went back to older throwaway jokes (like dwarves being apparently unisex) and used them as metaphors to discuss social change, racial assimilation, and other complex issues, while reexamining the species he’d thrown in at the margins of his world simply because they existed at the margins of every other fantasy universe. If goblins and orcs and trolls could think, then why were they always just there to be slaughtered by the heroes? And if the heroes slaughtered sentient beings en masse, how heroic exactly were they? It was a long overdue start on redressing issues long swept under the rug by a parade of Tolkien successors who never thought of anyone green and slimy as anything but a notch on the protagonist’s sword, and much of the urgency in Pratchett’s last few books seemed to be related to them. ‘There’s only one true evil in the world,’ he said through his characters. ‘And that’s treating people like they were things.’ And in the last of his ‘grown-up’ Discworld books, that idea is shouted with the ferocity of those who have only a few words left and want to make them count. Goblins are people. Golems are people. Dwarves are people, and they do not become any less people because they decide to go by the gender they know themselves to be instead of the one society forces on them. Even trains might be people, and you’ll never know one way or the other unless you ask them, because treating someone like they’re a person and not a thing should be your default. And the only people who cling to tradition at the expense of real people are sad, angry dwellers in the darkness who don’t even understand how pathetic they are, clutching and grasping at the things they remember without ever understanding that the world was never that simple to begin with. The future is bright, it is shining, and it belongs to everyone.”

— John Seavey, The Evolution of the Disc (via liquidlightandrunningtrees)

[dduane]

Oh great, who needed THIS?!

(Info's here: https://www.seriouseats.com/salmonella-egg-recall-july-2026-12026708 )

[transformativeworks]

Why AO3 Doesn't Have an Official App

#AO3 has no official app. All AO3 apps are from third parties – please be cautious about sharing your data with them. For information about why we don't have an app, and tips to make your AO3 experience more app-like, check out our latest news post: https://otw-news.org/yckzuv3v

Afrikaans • Čeština • dansk • Ελληνικά • English • español • italiano • lietuvių kalba • 日本語 • português brasileiro • português europeu • Română • Русский • slovenščina • Српски • Tiếng Việt • Українська

[pronouncingitwang]

at some point in your life you will be boiling fruit, water, sugar, and lemon juice in a pot to make a syrup or jam. the instructions will tell you to simmer for a certain amt of time. your timer will go off and you will look at the pot and go, "hm, this doesn't look thick enough. maybe i'll let it go for another 10 minutes." this is the devil speaking. it's only so liquid right now because it is at boiling point. it will thicken when it cools down. learn from the follies of my youth and do not let this happen to you

[yokowan]

at some point in your life you will be making a sauce or a stew in which you need to add cornstarch to thicken it. and you will prepare a slurry of starch in cold water and think "this looks like way too little starch to thicken this amount of liquid." this is the devil speaking. cornstarch instantly polymerizes at 95°C and if you add too much it will turn into an impossibly thick goop.

[le-jardin-inculte]

at some point in your life you will be making some sort of cream based dessert that requires gelatin to thicken it. and you will soak some gelatin sheets in water and think "this is too few gelatin sheets for this amount of cream." this is the devil speaking. it will thicken in the fridge and if you add too much you will end up with milk jelly

[shithowdy]

at some point in your life you will be baking cookies. you will take the sheet out after twelve minutes as the recipe instructs and the cookies will still be glistening and soft. "these don't seem cooked enough," you will think to yourself, "i should place them back into the oven until their edges are nice and golden." this is the devil talking. this is how you get dry, overdone cookies. the cookies will continue to bake on the warm sheet for several more minutes and then harden up after sitting on a rack for a while. trust the process. trust the process.

[whitachi]

at some point in your life you will be adding a small pasta to a soup and you will think "that is not enough small pasta." this is the devil talking. the pasta will absorb the stock and expand. this is how you end up with a soup that is a solid mass of soggy ditalini.

[araceil]

At some point in your life you will be adding garlic to a dish and you will think "that is not enough garlic." These are angels speaking. They are correct. Add more garlic.

[avadoingart-imus]

I'm in love with impressionism and I want to include it in my work. In order to do so, I need to study the style first, which led to this personal project of painting Aziraphale and Crowley in some of the scenes which Monet painted in his work.

That was the initial thought, then while trying to post on IG, I came up with short writings to give my audience a context. Now, I don't know if I could continue writing silly short conversations between the husbands to accompany the paintings in the future, but oh well let's just do it while I can.

Sorry for the yap. I have only done 3 paintings so far...

Having them together, I finally see that I have a thing for green...

[victusinveritas]

It's almost like something happened in 2020-now that is causing these problems.

[0ldstoneface]

Please don't delete your fics. Please don't delete your art. Please don't make this worse than it already is.

Please keep writing.

Please keep drawing.

Please keep creating and nurturing our community.

Don't let this be the end.

GNU Good Omens.

[phoen1xr0se]

New writing will be up next week.

I left the community because of a small number of people viciously attacked my enby child and my parenting in my inbox - I have been stalked and harassed on here and it doesn’t ruffle me, but come for my children and I will act accordingly. Their safety comes above my fandom whimsy, above everything else. Always.

But things have died down, and I’ve written a buttload since then, I have simply been too anxious to post any of it. Without getting into it, the fandom isn’t one I recognise at this moment in time. I am very much hoping that my escape to the highlands with @thavron next week will make me brave enough to edit and start posting on AO3 regularly again.

So see you soon, fandom, and thanks for allowing me the space to grieve and protect my peace.

[bardraelyn]

I have already written one post-S3 fic (with implied alternate S3 ending), composed in parts that work independently or together: a short fic with accompanying art for the TIC7 zine, and a flash fic / art combo for The Mischief, which will be on display at TIC7. This collection of interwoven art/fics is for everyone who needs something full of hope.

I am presently writing a S3 fix-it/alternate ending because I had an idea that wouldn’t let go. This one will not be lighthearted, but it will be full of love.

I have been writing part 2 of my 5-part Feast of All Saints series—my personal take on S3, which I started before S3 was confirmed, then canceled, then reconstituted as a movie. Part 2 is full of courage.

And tonight I start scripting my presenter notes for the resurrection ceremony I am hosting at TIC7. The panel will be full of joy.

[theravenmuse]

It’s July and my PFP is still wearing a Santa hat. Whoops.

[bardraelyn]

If you hadn't said anything, we'd have just thought you were doing a Christmas in July bit. 🎄

[queerofthedagger]

okay let's actually do this properly

Where do you write your fics/stories

Word

Google Docs

Scrivener

LibreOffice

Obsidian/Notion

ProtonDocs

Notes App

Directly into AO3

Ellipsus

Handwriting

Other (explain in tags?)

Remaining time: 2 days 7 hours

[firelikestars]

aziraphale is so brave i don’t even caaaaaaare. he is anxious every single second of s1 and yet he’s still stubbornly voicing his opinion to the archangels and to the metatron. he risks violence! he suffers violence!! sandalphon fucking socks him in the gut, we all saw that shit. but he wants to keep crowley and the world safe so he fights anyways. BRAVE. i don’t care what he or anyone else thinks.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

California’s privacy obstacle course

Hey, UK folks! Waterstones is having a 3-day pre-order sale that includes the UK paperback of Enshittification (which drops on Sept 1). Use SUMMER26 to get 25% off.

Data brokers are a cancer. There's a direct line from the unrestricted collection, retention and processing of our data to a host of evils, from deepfake porn to phishing scams; from racial discrimination in hiring to ICE roundups of migrants; from targeted election interference to identity theft:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/12/06/privacy-first/#but-not-just-privacy

Why do data brokers exist? Because we let them. Congress hasn't passed a new federal consumer privacy law since 1988, when they made it illegal for video stores to disclose your VHS rentals. All other acts of consumer surveillance are legal. Data brokers spy on us for the same reason your dog licks its balls: because they can, and we don't stop them:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/03/10/ice-tech/#foreseeable-outcomes

Getting rid of data brokers wouldn't solve all our problems, but it sure would go a long way to solving many of them. Rather than legally requiring platforms to spy on kids (to exclude them from being targeted by platforms' algorithms), we could prohibit platforms from spying on anyone, including kids, meaning kids couldn't be identified (much less targeted) by algorithms or ads:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/06/23/destroy-the-village/#to-save-it

Data brokers produce mountains of raw material used for every form of scam and torture. It's data brokers who power the gig economy's "algorithmic wage discrimination" system, where nurses and other workers are offered less pay based on how much credit card debt they're carrying:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/12/18/loose-flapping-ends/#luigi-has-a-point

Banning data brokers would make great sense, which is why Biden's CFPB banned data brokers (only to have Trump un-ban them):

https://pluralistic.net/2025/05/15/asshole-to-appetite/#ssn-for-sale

So the feds (both Congress and the executive branch) have surrendered, and that leaves states alone on the battlefield fighting the privacy wars alone. State legislatures have taken some big steps, but – crucially – they've stopped short of banning data brokers from operating within their borders. Having taken a ban on data brokers off the table, states are left with complex, often unworkable "compromises" that go nowhere.

This is where DROP comes in. DROP stands for "Delete Request and Opt-out Platform," and it's a new phase of California's privacy regime that kicks off next month. Under DROP, you fill in some paperwork and then the state requires every data brokerage operating in California to delete your data, as well as any inferences they've made about you based on that data:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/07/what-you-need-know-about-californias-drop-tool

Implementing DROP is nowhere near as good as banning data brokers. The idea that data brokers should be able to collect, retain and process your data unless you tell them not to implies that everyone starts off wanting to be spied on, and therefore data brokers should assume that unless they hear otherwise, we're delighted to be the subject of commercial surveillance. This is an incredibly stupid supposition, contradicted by all available evidence. For example, when Apple offered iPhone owners a one-click option to block Facebook from spying on them, 96% of iPhone owners clicked the button:

https://applescoop.org/story/facebook-must-inflict-pain-on-apple-says-mark-zuckerberg

Indeed, given this fact, one wonders why Apple bothers with the "don't spy on me" button at all. Why not have a "do spy on me" button that is unchecked by default, and leave users to dig through their settings to find the option to opt in to being surveilled? Of course, then it would make the fact that Apple spies on its customers and uses the data to target ads (with no way to opt out) a little awkward:

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

In the absence of a ban on surveillance without explicit, opt-in consent, we are left with the bizarre fiction that most of us want to be spied on, a fiction that pervades the DROP process, making the entire procedure nearly impossible to complete.

To start the DROP process, you must first create a Login.gov ID. This is an incredibly invasive process that involves photographing multiple pieces of ID and taking several selfies using special apps and webpages that hijack your device's camera and processor in a bid to prevent bad actors from spoofing the process. There's a plausible reason for this rigmarole: Login.gov is the authentication system for multiple federal, state and local IT systems in the US, so a fake or stolen Login.gov ID could be used to access your IRS, Social Security, and other very sensitive accounts.

The corollary of this is the promise of Login.gov: once you create your ID (a lengthy, multi-stage process) you won't have to jump through lots of painful bureaucratic hoops to access a wide variety of government services.

DROP didn't get the memo.

After you log in to DROP via Login.gov, you are sent a text message – to the phone number in your Login.gov profile – with a link to access a "secure" website that takes over your camera to let you take a "secure" photo of the front and back of your California driver's license or your US passport. What if you don't have either of those? I guess that means you want to be spied on by data brokers.

Note that these are the same credentials you have to supply to get the Login.gov ID that you've just used to get to this step in the process. In other words, in order to get to the stage where they ask you to photograph your driver's license, you have to have already photographed and validated your driver's license.

Once you complete this (pointless, redundant) step, you're directed back to your computer, where the process continues. Here, you must fill in all kinds of biographical detail, as well as specialized pieces of information, including your car's VIN. This is a piece of information that most people don't have – but which the California DMV does have and could auto-feed into the system, given that you've repeatedly affirmatively identified yourself to the service.

You also have to provide your mobile advertising identifier, a long, unique number that you may or may not be able to extract from your phone, depending on the model and the OS version. If you can't get it that way, you can install an app like AAID, which comes with a long list of – you guessed it – permissions to extract, store and process your private information.

Here's the thing: the whole point of a mobile ad identifier is that apps can access it (this is how they identify and track you). That step, where the system made you switch to your phone and use your camera to photograph your driver's license? That step could have automatically pulled this data off your device. That's the whole fucking point of this exercise: that web-pages and apps can request your mobile ad identifier.

Instead, DROP wants users to dig through their phone's deepest settings and/or install an app to retrieve a 32-digit number, which they then must key into a webform on their computer or in a different app on their phone.

Once you've done this, you must fill in another page of biographical information, including information that you've already provided to Login.gov and information you've already filled in on previous screens.

On this screen, you must also verify your phone number by sending yourself a text and then pasting in a unique number the system sends to you. But remember how this whole thing started? The first step is that you authenticate with Login.gov, which sends a text to your phone so you can take a (redundant) picture of your driver's license. There is no way you could get this far in the process unless you controlled the phone number you've just "verified" with the system.

Next, you must verify your email address, by receiving an email with a unique code in it and keying or pasting that into the webform, too. Again, remember how this process started: with you logging in with Login.gov, using your email address, which the system has already treated as verified since the very start of this (very) long and (very) complicated process.

This whole thing is terrible, and it is predicated on the absurd premise that Californians have to be defended from the threat of strangers who pretend to be them in order to sneakily opt them out of surveillance. DROP requires stronger authentication than any other US government system I've ever interacted with. I file my tax returns with fewer authentication steps. I renew my car's DMV registration with fewer authentication steps. I became a US citizen with fewer authentication steps.

This is either a system with no coherent threat model, or (far more probably), its threat model is that people will use it. This is California's answer to "a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'":

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy

It's especially instructive to compare this process to the steps you have to take in order to "opt in" to having a data broker open a file on you and stuff it full of your sensitive, personal information, which is then sold to all comers:

Step one: Exist.

Step two: There is no step two.

It's also instructive to compare this process to the steps a data broker has to take to spy on you and sell your data:

Step one: Exist.

Step two: There is no step two.

Though there are many obvious ways this could be made better, I want to stress here that you shouldn't have to do this at all. It's entirely backwards. The process for not being spied on should look like this:

Step one: Exist.

Step two: There is no step two.

If anyone is going to be forced to jump through hoops to participate in the mass collection and catastrophic mishandling of private data, it should be the data brokers, not the people they spy on.

This kind of malicious compliance is the inevitable outcome of a process that starts by taking the obvious best measure off the table. The answer to the problem of data brokers is banning data brokers, not creating a demented hairball of form-filling that maintains the fiction that data broker surveillance is consensual.

In its own way, this process reminds me of the whole "carbon credit" fiasco. The answer to too many carbon emissions is to democratically decide to ban certain kinds of carbon emissions. But that would require states to do things, rather than simply "nudging" a process that is guided by "the market." So we end up with these junk "credits" that companies manufacture by promising not to log forests, many of which are already wildlife preserves and/or subsequently burn down:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/31/carbon-upsets/#big-tradeoff

The best critique of this whole thing came in 2021 from the Climate Ad Project, who produced a short video in which people were allowed to kill one another provided they purchased "murder offsets":

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

In a state of nature, murder exists. We, as a society, have decided this is bad. Rather than creating "incentives" not to murder, we just banned murder. Admittedly, we still get some murders, but when these happen, we don't treat it as "a mispricing of the anti-murder incentive" – we treat it as a crime.

The commercial surveillance industry may not be a criminal enterprise (yet), but it is the source of a torrent of crime, a flood of crime, a tsunami of crime. Every piece of your information that a data broker possesses exposes you to the risk of being victimized by a criminal. For this reason, I strongly believe that you should go through the tedious, performatively difficult DROP process:

https://consumer.drop.privacy.ca.gov/

But let's not pretend that this is good – or even adequate. There is no demand for being spied on. There is no basis for taking such enormous care in making sure people aren't maliciously removed from surveillance databases. If these databases exist at all (they should not), then we should make spies go through all this paperwork, to prove that you do want to be spied on, and unless they manage it, then spying on us should be treated as the crime it is.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/07/23/drop-a-dime/#privacy-theater

[go-learn-esperanto]

Hey. If people aren't aware, Microsoft admitted they know who you and where you are at all times and will give your info to the police.

They have a Global Device Identifier (GDID) Tracker that functions as a fingerprint for your PC that can surpass VPNs, proxy servers and countries. Although it can't survive a clean reinstall of Windows (it can survive updates), because Microsoft forces you to go to the internet and log in into a Microsoft account, they will be able to get to you.

Microsoft kept it secret and it was only found out when the FBI tracked a hacker thanks to the information Microsoft gave them.

You should be paying attention to this, and possibly consider moving away from Windows. If a government, especially the US government, doesn't like you for some reason, this could be seriously concerning.

This article specifically notes:

For journalism, activism, or domestic abuse situations, skip Windows and use Linux routed through Tor instead of a commercial VPN. A GDID doesn’t care which VPN you use, only that it’s still the same Windows installation.

Microsoft admits Windows 11 has a GDID tracker with no off switch, first documented publicly in an FBI hacker complaint

GDID is the persistent Windows ID that helped FBI trace a Scattered Spider hacker despite VPNs. Here's how it works and how to limit it.

Other important quotes:

What has researchers uneasy is everything else the case reveals. Costin Raiu, a well-known malware researcher, asked on the Three Buddy Problem podcast how much of this exists on other platforms, and whether it is linked more permanently to hardware. Matthew Hickey, another security researcher, called Windows “surveillance software”.

Two things back that up:

There’s no consent screen. A GDID gets assigned when you sign into a Microsoft Account. Apple’s advertising identifier needs an App Tracking Transparency prompt and a visible reset; Android’s works the same way. GDID has neither, and a Windows reinstall only gets you a new number Microsoft can still get back to the same account.

Then there’s activation. Massgrave, the group behind Microsoft Activation Scripts, notes that Windows setup sends hardware info to Microsoft and gets identifiers back, the same tokens later used for Store access and licensing: “It’s impossible to prevent Windows from getting a GDID without breaking activation and UWP app[s].” Anyone who lost a license after swapping a motherboard has already met a smaller version of this.