
#dc comics#dc#batman#bruce wayne#dc fanart#dick grayson#tim drake#batfamily#batfam



seen from Italy

seen from Czechia

seen from Türkiye

seen from Australia

seen from Malaysia
seen from Singapore
seen from Trinidad & Tobago
seen from China
seen from Türkiye

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from Singapore

seen from Maldives
seen from China

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Türkiye

seen from United States
So, in Brazilian politics and data rights news, the Federal Data Processing Service (Serpro), Brazil's biggest government-owned corporation of IT services, is now officially allowed to sell citizens' private data to third parties.
The decision is in Ordinance 167 of the Federal Revenue (roughly our IRS), published this Tuesday, April 19th 2022, in the Federal Official Gazette (the official journal of the federal government). It would be a way for the agency to be remunerated for the service and for the costs in machine use.
Among the data that can be sold are many that are considered 'sensitive' and that have to be notified in case of leaks by hacker attacks, such as e-mail, telephone, CPF (Registry of Physical Person, individual taxpayer registry), physical person's address, company regime, and qualification of person in charge of company.
Deputy André Figueiredo (Democratic Labour Party - PDT) has submitted a draft legislative decree to the Chamber of Deputies aiming to stop the effects of the Ministry of Economy Ordinances, especially those of the Federal Revenue Service of Brazil, which grant Serpro authorization to share data with third parties under allegation of execution of public policies.
(x)
The Threshold of Exhaustion
Alexia Putellas x Female!Reader
Word Count: ~5,120 words
TW: Bornout, physical and emotional exhaustion, hospitalization/ER setting, emotional betrayal, miscommunication, emotional reconciliation, eventual high-key fluff, domestic comfort, and excessive clinginess.
Summary: Being the Chief of Neurosurgery at Hospital Vall d'Hebron is an elite, high-stakes life; being Alexia Putellas’s secret girlfriend is an entirely different kind of stress. When you overhear Alexia brutally downplaying your relationship to her inner circle just to protect her privacy, you don't fight. You just glaze over. You match her secrecy with a total, frozen wall of clinical silence. But when months of heartbreaking distance and back-to-back craniotomies push your body past its breaking point, you collapse on the hospital floor. Receiving a terrifying call from the ER, a frantic Alexia has to rush to your bedside, face the devastating fallout of her own words, and fight with everything she has to win back the brilliantly funny, unbreakably clingy woman she nearly destroyed.
The brain was entirely an organ of electricity and structural tolerance. It could process trauma, map intricate motor pathways, and withstand the extreme pressure of a high-speed collision, provided the blood supply remained pure. But as the Chief of Neurosurgery at Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, you knew that even the most brilliant neural networks had a definitive, absolute threshold. If you pushed a system too hard without letting it cool down, the circuits would simply melt.
For three years, your relationship with Alexia Putellas had been your sanctuary—the one place where you didn't have to be the youngest, sharpest surgical chief in the country.
Apple threatens to stop selling iPhones in the EU
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/2025/09/26/empty-threats/#500-million-affluent-consumers
Apple has threatened to stop selling iPhones and other devices in the European Union (home to over 500,000,000 affluent consumers) if the bloc doesn't rescind the Digital Markets Act, a democratically accountable anti-monopoly law that bans Apple from blocking third parties from offering services to iPhone owners:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/sep/25/apple-calls-for-changes-to-anti-monopoly-laws-and-says-it-may-stop-shipping-to-the-eu
Apple has a staunch ally in this campaign to overturn European laws: Donald Trump has threatened the EU with tariffs unless it halts its attempts to regulate US tech giants like Apple, whose billionaire CEO Tim Cook gave Donald Trump $1m in exchange for a seat on the dais at Trump's inauguration and then traveled to DC again to hand-assemble a gilded participation trophy as a gift to America's fascist would-be dictator:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/08/07/tim-cook-trump-gift/85555805007/
This is a painfully stupid threat and the EU should call Apple's bluff. The company claims that it is acting in the interest of European owners of Apple products. Apple claims that by blocking Europeans from using their Apple devices with third-party software and hardware, they are protecting their customers' privacy.
This is nonsense. While it's true that Apple protects its customers' privacy from some external threats, Apple also spies on its users, without their consent, in order to gather behavioral data that's used for Apple's ad-targeting system. When this came to light, Apple lied to its customers about it:
https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/14/luxury-surveillance/#liar-liar
Apple has used its exclusive control over which software can operate on its devices to expose every Chinese iOS user to unrestricted government surveillance. Apple removed all working VPNs from its Chinese app store:
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-removes-vpn-apps-from-china-app-store/
The company then backdoored its iCloud backup for unrestricted access by Chinese authorities:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-censorship-data.html
Then they removed the ability to anonymously share messages via Airdrop to curb the tool's usage to spread opposition messages during a wave of mass protests in China (they took away this functionality for every Airdrop user in the world):
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/30/apple-limited-a-crucial-airdrop-function-in-china-just-weeks-before-protests.html
The idea that Apple is so committed to its users' privacy that it will exit a major market rather than expose users to surveillance risks is an obvious lie – just ask China.
Why would Apple tell this lie? Because it wants to protect its profits – not its customers.
Apple lies when it claims that control over its platforms is primarily about protecting users. The App Store is "teeming with scams":
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/apple-e2-80-99s-tightly-controlled-app-store-is-teeming-with-scams/ar-AAKL0TG
However, by forcing Apple customers to get apps from Apple's own store, the company can skim a 30% commission on every dollar its customers send to an app maker, a Patreon performer, a news outlet or any other app supplier – a business that's worth $100b/year to Apple. Remember, in the EU, the cost of processing a payment is between 0% and 1%.
Apple claims that it protects its customers from privacy risks by blocking third-party repair depots and by requiring its customers to pay through the nose for official repair. But Apple's own repair technicians have been caught plundering and sharing nude images of its own customers, stolen from phones that were sent to Apple:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkbkey/she-sent-her-iphone-to-apple-repair-techs-uploaded-her-nudes-to-facebook
This has happened repeatedly:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/11/12/an-apple-store-employee-helped-customerby-texting-himself-private-photo-her-phone/
All over the world:
https://9to5mac.com/2016/10/12/apple-australia-photo-sharing-ring-nsfw/
(And of course, these are just the instances that we know about).
Apple protects its customers from privacy threats, but not from Apple's own predatory, privacy-invasive, rent-extracting conduct. Apple also gets to unilaterally decide which scams are permitted on its platform and which ones are not, and they alone get to decide when to allow secret, pervasive surveillance of Apple customers.
I wanted to make a post talking about the way Disney got their digital animated movies from the 80’s and 90’s onto film because it is to me a fascinating era of animation history.
But that didn’t work out the way I planned…
Here’s the thing. We know HOW Disney did it, because they’ve told us. But they’ve told us in the most vague terms possible.
So cast your mind back. This was the late 80’s and early 90’s. Movies in the cinema are still processed on physical film. So how do you get your movie that was animated on the computer out onto physical film? There’s no digital to film service or process at the time. Everything is still analogue. Digital projections wouldn’t widely populate theaters until the early 2000’s.
So how did they do it?
Once again the process for getting images off the computer and onto film was a very low tech solution. Basically they had a special monitor that displayed each image of the film frame by frame, and they had a film camera pointed down at it that took a frame each time the display advanced.
It was even illustrated in that recent A Goofy Movie documentary over on Disney+:
The anecdote goes that while exporting A Goofy Movie to film there was a pixel blown out on the monitor, leaving a big black dot in every frame of the film. And they didn’t notice it until they were screening very close to the end of production, causing a delay as they had to basically re-shoot the entire film at great expense!
So that’s the how, right? It’s a monitor, they point a film camera at it, that’s how digital frames are exported to film. Simple! But what I wanted to know were more technical details.
Like… what was the resolution? We couldn’t possibly have had 4K CRT or LCD displays in 1989, right? Was it a flat screen display? The Goofy Movie documentary seems to showcase it as a flat screen, but how much of that is just artist interpretation for clarity? Who made the display? What brand was it? Was it custom?
I’m terribly sorry to say I couldn’t find any concrete information on what sort of display it was. Maybe that information is somewhere, but it wasn’t anywhere I knew where to look.
I was hoping to make this another rabbit hole post of obscure history, but I sadly came up short. Maybe someone in the comments or reblogs will be able to offer more insight?
Sexual deepfakes continue to get more sophisticated, capable, easy to access, and perilous for millions of women who are abused with the tec
Open the website of one explicit deepfake generator and you’ll be presented with a menu of horrors. With just a couple of clicks, it offers you the ability to convert a single photo into an eight-second explicit videoclip, inserting women into realistic-looking graphic sexual situations. “Transform any photo into a nude version with our advanced AI technology,” text on the website says.
The options for potential abuse are extensive. Among the 65 video “templates” on the website are a range of “undressing” videos where the women being depicted will remove clothing—but there are also explicit video scenes named “fuck machine deepthroat” and various “semen” videos. Each video costs a small fee to be generated; adding AI-generated audio costs more.
The website, which WIRED is not naming to limit further exposure, includes warnings saying people should only upload photos they have consent to transform with AI. It’s unclear if there are any checks to enforce this.
PSA: potential AI-generated destiel art
I have been chatting with a few friends and we have concerns that a fan may be posting AI-generated fanart. They are @/ZThompson29302 on X and @/drawlikez on Instagram. Before I dive in to why we think Z is posting AI art, let's go over a few red flags to look for when identifying AI-generated images
Account is recently created
High volume of posts compared to age of account
A variety of styles and skill levels demonstrated within a short period of time
Lack of personalization in captions; lack of process videos, sketches, or other behind-the-scenes posts
Images appear hyper-rendered with oddly vibrant and usually high-contrast colors
Lighting comes from more than one location; shadows don't make sense
Brushstrokes are invisible and/or highly blended
Orange haze/filter
Certain shapes or objects blend into one another (e.g. a braid in the hair turns into the knit of the sweater)
Overall "unnerving" effect
I also want to address why I am making this post: Z has a Patreon (as of this month) and is making nearly $25 a month from 4 members. If they are posting AI art, they are profiting off it, and that is despicable.
And a disclaimer: I am only including links so that you can verify this information for yourself. I am not here to spread hate but to provide a public service announcement. If you feel the need to do anything, block, report, and move on. Don't interact; don't be an asshole.
Okay now let's get into it, one bullet point at a time
1. Account Age
Z's Twitter account was created January 2025, but their first post (that we can see) was January 20 of this year. Their first Instagram post was November 19 of 2025.
2. Volume of Posts
Z has 29 posts on their Instagram, all of which are unique pieces. In other words, there are no process posts or sketches* of an unfinished piece. Many of them are posted on the same day. Regardless, this averages to 3 unique fanart pieces per week for 3 months. I don't think anyone is creating digital art that quickly!
One post does have the caption, "Just some old pieces to pad my page out," but the other "old pieces" are not identified. This particular post is of a drawing of Cas. It is drawn in the same exact style and pose as one of Dean, posted the day before (see below). If these were both older pieces (which they should be because they are in the same style), it would make more sense to mention that under the piece posted first, the one of Dean.
Overall, this is not enough evidence to indicate that the majority of their art was made before the account was created.
*literally as I was writing this, they posted a sketch. more on that later.
Generative AI Policy (February 9, 2024)
As of February 9, 2024, we are updating our Terms of Service to prohibit the following content:
Images created through the use of generative AI programs such as Stable Diffusion, Midjourney, and Dall-E.
This post explains what that means for you. We know it’s impossible to remove all images created by Generative AI on Pillowfort. The goal of this new policy, however, is to send a clear message that we are against the normalization of commercializing and distributing images created by Generative AI. Pillowfort stands in full support of all creatives who make Pillowfort their home. Disclaimer: The following policy was shaped in collaboration with Pillowfort Staff and international university researchers. We are aware that Artificial Intelligence is a rapidly evolving environment. This policy may require revisions in the future to adapt to the changing landscape of Generative AI.
-
Why is Generative AI Banned on Pillowfort?
Our Terms of Service already prohibits copyright violations, which includes reposting other people’s artwork to Pillowfort without the artist’s permission; and because of how Generative AI draws on a database of images and text that were taken without consent from artists or writers, all Generative AI content can be considered in violation of this rule. We also had an overwhelming response from our user base urging us to take action on prohibiting Generative AI on our platform.
-
How does Pillowfort define Generative AI?
As of February 9, 2024 we define Generative AI as online tools for producing material based on large data collection that is often gathered without consent or notification from the original creators.
Generative AI tools do not require skill on behalf of the user and effectively replace them in the creative process (ie - little direction or decision making taken directly from the user). Tools that assist creativity don't replace the user. This means the user can still improve their skills and refine over time.
For example: If you ask a Generative AI tool to add a lighthouse to an image, the image of a lighthouse appears in a completed state. Whereas if you used an assistive drawing tool to add a lighthouse to an image, the user decides the tools used to contribute to the creation process and how to apply them.
Examples of Tools Not Allowed on Pillowfort: Adobe Firefly* Dall-E GPT-4 Jasper Chat Lensa Midjourney Stable Diffusion Synthesia
Example of Tools Still Allowed on Pillowfort:
AI Assistant Tools (ie: Google Translate, Grammarly) VTuber Tools (ie: Live3D, Restream, VRChat) Digital Audio Editors (ie: Audacity, Garage Band) Poser & Reference Tools (ie: Poser, Blender) Graphic & Image Editors (ie: Canva, Adobe Photoshop*, Procreate, Medibang, automatic filters from phone cameras)
*While Adobe software such as Adobe Photoshop is not considered Generative AI, Adobe Firefly is fully integrated in various Adobe software and falls under our definition of Generative AI. The use of Adobe Photoshop is allowed on Pillowfort. The creation of an image in Adobe Photoshop using Adobe Firefly would be prohibited on Pillowfort.
-
Can I use ethical generators?
Due to the evolving nature of Generative AI, ethical generators are not an exception.
-
Can I still talk about AI?
Yes! Posts, Comments, and User Communities discussing AI are still allowed on Pillowfort.
-
Can I link to or embed websites, articles, or social media posts containing Generative AI?
Yes. We do ask that you properly tag your post as “AI” and “Artificial Intelligence.”
-
Can I advertise the sale of digital or virtual goods containing Generative AI?
No. Offsite Advertising of the sale of goods (digital and physical) containing Generative AI on Pillowfort is prohibited.
-
How can I tell if a software I use contains Generative AI?
A general rule of thumb as a first step is you can try testing the software by turning off internet access and seeing if the tool still works. If the software says it needs to be online there’s a chance it’s using Generative AI and needs to be explored further.
You are also always welcome to contact us at [email protected] if you’re still unsure.
-
How will this policy be enforced/detected?
Our Team has decided we are NOT using AI-based automated detection tools due to how often they provide false positives and other issues. We are applying a suite of methods sourced from international universities responding to moderating material potentially sourced from Generative AI instead.
-
How do I report content containing Generative AI Material?
If you are concerned about post(s) featuring Generative AI material, please flag the post for our Site Moderation Team to conduct a thorough investigation. As a reminder, Pillowfort’s existing policy regarding callout posts applies here and harassment / brigading / etc will not be tolerated.
Any questions or clarifications regarding our Generative AI Policy can be sent to [email protected].