Mick’s arrived in Chiba City at some point in the future, and needs coffee…

The rain here didn’t fall, right? It sort of hissed. Hissed like a radiator needing bleeding.

Mick stood under an awning that was flashing blue, then pink, then a sort of angry green. Chiba City. The brochure said Neon Jewel of the East. Mick said it was a wet bloody headache with too many wires.

He needed a coffee. Not a stim-shot. Not a Caf-Pow! energy patch slapped on the jugular. He wanted a mug. Ceramic. Hot. Brown liquid that tasted like burnt beans and morning regret.

—Excuse me, pal, Mick said to a passing drone that looked like a floating toaster. The toaster ignored him.

His head was thumping. The jet lag—or the orbital lag, whatever they called it—felt like someone had taken a spanner to the back of his neck.

—Coffee, he muttered, stepping into the crowd.

The pavement was moving. Actually moving. He had to hop off it onto a static bit of grate to get his bearings. People were walking past with visors on, their eyes glowing white, muttering to people who weren’t there.

—Madness, Mick said. —Absolute state of it.

He saw a sign. THE ROAST.

—Result.

He pushed through a door that slid open with a sound like a sigh. Inside, it smelled of ozone and damp wool, not coffee. A robot with six arms was wiping the counter.

—Tea? The robot asked. Its voice was smooth, like velvet.

—Coffee, Mick said.

—Black. No sugar. And put it in a mug, yeah? None of that pouch rubbish.

—We have Nutri-Sludge Mocha, Star Dust Espresso, and Void Black Stim.

—Just coffee, for fuck sake!

He leaned on the counter. He was so tired he could have slept standing up.

—Just hot water and beans. You got beans?

—Beans are Class C restricted organic matter, the robot said brightly.

—Would you like a warm cup of grey nutrient paste?

Mick looked at the robot. The robot looked at Mick.

—Is it hot? Mick asked.

—Boiling!

—Go on then, Mick sighed.

—Give us the grey stuff. And don't skimp on the heat.

On a Thursday in December 2024, just over a year ago, a conference for library staff from across the North East of England was held at Newcastle City Library, entitled Culture, Creativity and Collaboration. One of the keynote speakers was Arts Council England’s Director of Libraries, Luke Barton, who gave a talk centred on artificial intelligence.

One of the central themes of his talk, and the idea that stayed with me most clearly, was this: just as public library staff have been instrumental over the past thirty years in helping people learn to use computers, we will likely play a similar role as artificial intelligence becomes more present in everyday life. From email and internet use to the foundational applications that modern society now relies on, libraries have long acted as places where people can encounter new technologies with support, patience, and without judgement. The suggestion was that this quiet, steady work is far from finished. It is simply being carried forward in new contexts.

One of the main ideas Luke raised was that public library staff may increasingly help people differentiate between authentic and inauthentic information and imagery. This may well prove to be the case as AI becomes more widespread. However, my day-to-day experience so far suggests that the initial way people are likely to encounter AI in the public library will unfold differently in practice. Before questions of authenticity arise, what most people will notice first is AI’s potential as a set of effective, practical tools.

For many people, the initial encounter with AI follows a familiar pattern. The impact of incredibly realistic AI generated images arrives loudly, and the implications of this understandably demand attention. There are immediate questions about using technology to replace our need to write, to craft, to create, and what that might mean for us as thinking, creative beings. This is where much public discussion currently sits: AI as a force of disruption, generating content that competes with human work. Meanwhile, a different mode of AI is already being used more quietly and consistently: AI as an assistant, capable, responsive, and ready to be deployed in steady, practical ways. These two faces of the technology, the spectacular and the supportive, operate on different timescales and provoke different responses. One arrives as a challenge to existing practices. The other settles in as an enhancement of them. At the public library desk, it is primarily this second, quieter form that people are likely to encounter first.

Example #1: Library patron asking for advice

A library patron approached the desk looking for help with her photos. She has many saved across various devices, which she did not have with her at the time. She wants to keep them within her Apple ecosystem and stop them from saving to Google apps from previous devices and historical settings.

Amongst the staff, we have varied levels of technical knowledge, often leaning more towards Apple or Google / Android depending on our own usage. Without the patron’s devices in front of us, enquiries like this can be tricky and often rely on partial knowledge or educated guesswork. More commonly, we would ask the patron to bring the devices in on another visit so we could work through it together.

However, we now have an alternative.

In the examples that follow, the AI tool in use is Microsoft Copilot, abbreviated here as CP. This reflects its integration into our existing Windows environment, and the fact that it is currently the only AI assistant formally available for staff use within our organisation.

CP prompt: Patron has an Apple iPad and an iPhone. Her photos are still being stored on Google from previous settings. How does she change settings so that her photos are just on Apple devices?

CP response: Copilot produced a clear, library friendly explanation that could be passed directly to the patron. It presented an easily followable numbered list of general instructions, written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary jargon and assuming no specialist knowledge. Crucially, the steps were structured in a way that worked just as well on paper as on screen. This was printed off for the patron to take home. The hope is that she can not only change the relevant settings herself, but also gain a better understanding of how her devices are managing her data. In doing so, we have potentially avoided a return trip, but more importantly, we have enabled her to engage more confidently with the technology she already owns.

The enquiry desk itself is a kind of threshold space. It sits between public and private, confidence and uncertainty, familiarity and first encounter. People arrive with partial knowledge, half formed questions, and varying degrees of comfort with technology. In that space, the role of the library is not to introduce tools for their own sake, but to meet people where they are, using whatever means are most appropriate to help them move forward.

At the public library desk, context matters. Who is present, what the question is really about, and how much information someone is ready to take in at that moment. Using AI in this setting is rarely something to announce or foreground. The focus remains on the task in hand. A degree of discretion is often required, out of sensitivity to the situation, the person in front of you, and the working context more broadly. This is simply the time we are in.

Example #2: Patron trying to identify a book from memory

A patron was looking for a general history of the world that he had briefly picked up at his sister’s house over Christmas. He could not remember the author or the exact title, only aspects of the book’s contents. He recalled that it was a relatively recent popular history, with chapters focusing on land and border disputes.

Without an author, title or publication date, this kind of enquiry would usually involve a broad catalogue search, some educated guessing, and possibly asking the patron to return if more details came back to him. It can be a frustrating process for both staff and borrower, particularly when the book feels just out of reach.

CP prompt: A particular general history of the world, chapters on land disputes, border disputes, relatively recent publication, popular history, title something like A Brief History of the World.

CP response: Copilot interpreted the description as a search problem rather than a request for a single answer. It produced a short, curated list of recently published popular histories of the world, explicitly highlighting those with chapter level focus on borders, land, and territorial disputes, and titles similar to the one described.

The first book in the list was the correct one: A Brief History of the World in 47 Borders by Jonn Elledge.

The patron was delighted, not only by the speed with which the book was identified, but by the fact that his vague recollection had been treated as a valid starting point rather than an obstacle. He was able to place a request immediately from one of our sister branches.

What made this interaction successful was not simply access to a large body of information, but the ability to work productively with uncertainty. In this case, CP acted less as a source of knowledge and more as an intermediary between partial human memory and the library’s existing systems. Used in this way, it allowed staff to meet the patron where he was, translating an imprecise description into something actionable, and turning a fragile, easily dismissed enquiry into something that could be acted on immediately.

Enquiries like this are common at a public library desk. People often arrive with incomplete information, uncertain memory, or a sense that what they have to offer may not be enough. Traditional systems tend to assume clarity, a title, an author, a correct term. When those are missing, the risk is that the enquiry stalls, or that the person feels they have reached the limits of what can be done. What makes the desk different is that uncertainty is not treated as a problem to be corrected, but as a normal starting point. Help can be shaped around what is present, rather than what is absent. In this context, tailored assistance matters because it can adapt as the conversation unfolds, responding to hesitations, partial recall, and changing emphasis. Generic tools struggle here not because they lack information, but because they are not designed for this kind of human exchange. The value lies in the mediation, in recognising when something vague is still worth pursuing, and in knowing how to carry it forward.

Example #3: Reader looking to move beyond a single author

A patron was looking for new authors within the espionage fiction genre. They had enjoyed the novels of John le Carré but were struggling to find other writers who might suit their tastes. They were keen to avoid anything that felt overtly imitative, and specifically wanted work engaging with modern political conditions, contemporary technologies, and present-day global tensions, rather than historical Cold War settings.

We are accustomed to using a small number of online resources and recommendation tools for this kind of enquiry, often supplemented by staff knowledge and experience. While these can be useful, they tend to produce fairly generic results and do not always adapt well to the subtleties of a reader’s preferences, particularly when someone is looking for a tone or sensibility rather than a direct analogue.

CP prompt: A reader enjoys John le Carré but is looking for modern espionage fiction dealing with contemporary politics and technology, without direct imitation.

CP response: CP produced a tailored list of authors and specific titles that matched the request, accompanied by brief explanations of why each recommendation might appeal. In addition, it offered a secondary list of suggestions that were slightly broader or adjacent to the brief. These were potential next steps if the patron felt inclined to explore further. This created a set of options with different degrees of proximity to the original preference, rather than a single, rigid recommendation.

The strength of this interaction lay in how closely the recommendations were shaped around the individual reader, rather than around a fixed set of categories or comparisons. Instead of producing a single, static list, the suggestions could be adjusted in response to hesitation, clarification, or curiosity as the conversation unfolded. Preferences could be refined, boundaries tested, and the scope narrowed or widened without losing the thread of what the reader was actually looking for. In this sense, CP did not replace existing readers advisory tools so much as extend them. Used at the desk, it supported a more conversational and exploratory form of guidance that reflects how people usually talk about books they care about, allowing that talk to develop naturally rather than forcing it into predetermined pathways.

Interactions like these do not take place in isolation. They happen within shared working spaces, alongside colleagues with different levels of confidence, interest, and experience with digital tools. Curiosity and hesitation often coexist, sometimes in the same person. Ethical concerns are also a significant factor. As elsewhere, staff bring a range of views about artificial intelligence into the workplace, and some may choose not to engage with these tools at all on that basis. These positions are not abstract. They sit alongside practical considerations of workload, timing, and comfort, and must be taken seriously. New ways of working are rarely adopted all at once. They tend to emerge unevenly, tested in low stakes moments, discussed informally between colleagues, and shaped as much by shared values as by technical capability. What matters is not uniform enthusiasm or expertise, but the space to ask questions, to observe what works, and to decide, collectively and individually, what feels appropriate to bring into everyday practice.

Example #4: Staff development during a quiet period

A quiet morning in the week between Christmas and New Year provided some rare breathing space at the desk. With fewer immediate enquiries, it became a good opportunity to catch up on gaps in staff knowledge. In this case, everyday use of Microsoft Windows. Many of us have been using these applications for years, often by habit, improvisation, and workarounds rather than formal understanding.

With CP now available, we effectively have an expert sitting quietly in the corner of the screen, able to help with almost any aspect of software we have previously just made do with.

One small but telling example was the split screen option in Windows, where a menu appears offering different layout styles. Having only ever triggered this accidentally, I thought it would be useful to know how to bring it up deliberately and use it properly. Previously, this kind of question might have gone unanswered, been solved via a quick web search, or simply ignored in favour of continuing with familiar but suboptimal methods. Learning tended to be reactive rather than intentional and often felt disconnected from the flow of daily work.

CP prompt: That split screen option in Windows, where a menu comes up showing different styles of split screen: how do I bring that up on purpose and use it properly?

CP response: CP immediately identified the feature in question as Snap Layouts in Windows 11 and explained how to access it intentionally. The response was clear, practical, and framed in plain language, focusing on exactly the behaviour I had described rather than assuming prior knowledge or correct terminology.

What stood out here was not the feature itself, but the way learning took place. The question arose from direct experience at the desk during an otherwise unremarkable shift. Rather than being deferred, ignored, or solved through trial and error, it could be addressed immediately, in language that matched how the problem had been noticed in the first place. This kind of interaction supports staff learning as part of everyday work rather than something set apart from it. Small uncertainties can be resolved when they arise, without formal training or specialist knowledge, and without drawing attention to gaps in confidence. Over time, these incremental moments add up, quietly strengthening familiarity and ease with the tools already in use.

None of the examples above are intended as a model to be adopted wholesale, or as an argument for how public libraries should be using artificial intelligence. They reflect particular moments, particular people, and particular judgements made in context. In each case, the technology itself is only part of what is at work. The outcomes depend just as much on timing, discretion, and an understanding of when a tool is useful, and when it is not.

There are questions here that remain open. How trust is built and maintained. How staff confidence develops over time. How ethical concerns are acknowledged and respected within shared working environments. How new tools can be explored without displacing the values that already underpin public library work. These are not questions with settled answers, and they are unlikely to be resolved by policy statements or technical guidance alone.

For now, it may be enough to notice what is already happening quietly at the desk. Small, situational uses of AI that sit alongside existing practices rather than replacing them. Moments where uncertainty is treated as workable. Instances where things that might otherwise stall are able to move, often in small and unremarkable ways.

Vi har lært mye de siste ukene om Terje Rød-Larsen og Mona Juuls tvilsomme affærer og imponerende venneliste via Epstein-filene. Et av navnene som ikke har kommet opp direkte, er Jens Stoltenberg. Men det kommer opp indirekte. 

I mars 2014 skriver Jeffrey Epstein til Bill Gates at “another Norwegian” tar over som “head of NATO” – “now you know”. Lite oppsiktsvekkende I seg selv, for dette var samme dag som Stoltenberg ble utnevnt som NATO-sjef. Men Epstein supplerer: “terje wife de facto security advisor . soon to be ambassador to london.”

Her antyder altså Epstein at Mona Juul, kona til hans gode venn Terje Rød-Larsen, er en slags sikkerhetsrådgiver for Stoltenberg i den nye rollen. Kanskje skryter han bare for å gjøre seg selv mer interessant for Gates? 

Om det er tomt skryt eller ikke, fortsetter det i alle fall. I september 2016 skriver Epstein til tech-oligarken Peter Thiel at han skal snakke med “head of nato later”. Et år senere skriver Epstein til en indisk milliardær (på den tiden en av verdens rikeste menn): «If you want a private dinner with head of NATO I Will organize , but not attend”. 

Vi vet at Stoltenbergs kone Ingrid Schulerud er nær venninne av Mona Juul. Så gode venner at ekteparet Stoltenberg fikk låne leiligheten ved flere anledninger. Blant annet da de pusset opp boligen sin i Oslo. Det er den samme leiligheten Jeffrey Epstein var svært behjelpelig med å skaffe til Rød-Larsen og Juul til en gunstig pris. 

Dette er små drypp. Kanskje bare eksempler på at Epstein forsøker å gi et falskt inntrykk av at han kan skaffe tilgang til Stoltenberg gjennom sin venn Terje. Uansett er det verdt å kikke nærmere på. 

Que estas cartas mantenham o caminho aberto,

e que te guiem até mim,

como a luz guia quem se perdeu na noite,

como o coração reconhece, sem erro, aquilo que sempre foi seu.

Que cada palavra seja um passo,

cada linha, um reencontro silencioso,

e que, mesmo quando tudo parecer distante,

que você ainda encontre em mim o lugar onde sempre pertenceu.

1. I love playing Wordle with you every day. I think it’s really cute how I sometimes get stuck and I look at your words because I know that you’ll use steak probably.

2. I love that I get to feel smart and teach you little things here and there, you’re a really good student and an even better listener.

3. I really love the fact that you let me lecture at you, like in the shower. I know that you’re tired and when it’s late or a long day you probably don’t want to learn about RSA encryption or something about math, but you still listen to me and let me gush and write over the walls.

4. I think you put up with a lot, and also for a lot of time. I think I was in the wrong for sometimes making my insecurities your fault. For example if I felt unattractive, I should’ve asked her for help with that instead of blaming you for making me feel that way. It was really kind of you to still try really hard when I was being a dick about it.

5. Even though we’re in very different financial situations, the fact that we go 50-50 on things and you also treat me is really fucking sweet of you.

6. I know I’ve been putting a lot of pressure on you, but even through that you still put in so much effort to accommodate the things I ask, like me talking about how I want to be listened to.

7. I used to think about how it would be almost impossible for me to find someone who would be able to get me, because I would require them to be someone who was raised seriously online while also being well adjusted. You’re that person.

8. I don’t want you to force yourself to be there for me when I ask for it, but that being said when I do ask for it you push yourself so hard to be there for me. I believe a lot in intentions mattering, and there’s no purer intention than that.

9. Hugging you just makes my body relax and my mind go quiet. I feel safe in your arms.

10. You’ve indulged every one of my fantasies, even when it’s something out of your comfort zone.

11. Even though it’s an insecurity of yours, you let me have tummy time. You’re my personal stuffed animal.

12. You carried me to diamond 2 on DPS by pocketing me, letting me play pharmercy. I don’t queue up because I don’t have you supporting me. Before you I literally was struggling to get to plat on DPS.

13. The fact that I can play these games with you, and you’re GOOD at them. Like you’re my duoq, and you’re fun to play with, you don’t get tilted to the point where it’s not fun, and you want to play with me. That’s a dream I never even dared think about because I thought it’d be impossible.

14. I’d happily eat cup-o-noodles for months straight and instead spend the money on the stuff I got so that you can have a setup next to mine. I think about the first post you made of us playing overwatch next to each other.

15. It’s a core memory to me when we turn showers into water gun fights with our mouths. You let me do such stupid things with you, and match my energy so well.

Lydia's Weekly Lifestyle blog is for today's African girl, so no subject is taboo. My purpose is to share things that may interest today's African girl.

This week's contributors: Lydia, Pépé Pépinière, Titi. This week's subjects: Effortless Transitions: From Boardroom Meetings to Evening Soirées, PFAS and Fashion, Valentines and the Chinese, Shop right or shop wrong? and Ga Kenkey and dare to be different

---

Effortless Transitions: From Boardroom Meetings to Evening Soirées. The Corporate Girl’s Guide to Day-to-Night Slay. There’s a certain rhythm to life in Accra — the soft hum of morning traffic, the steady buzz of boardroom discussions, and the glittering pulse of evening rooftops. The modern corporate girl in this city isn’t just working; she’s thriving. Her days stretch from high-stakes meetings in East Legon to late-evening networking mixers at Skybar. And through it all, she manages to look impeccably put-together — polished by day, radiant by night. So how does she pull it off? Simple: she’s mastered the art of effortless transitions. Start Strong: The Power Base: Your base outfit is everything. Think sleek, versatile, and comfortable. A well-fitted sheath dress in a neutral tone (charcoal, ivory, or deep olive) can glide seamlessly from the boardroom to a cocktail lounge. Or, go for a chic wide-leg trouser and silk blouse combo — breathable for Accra’s heat and classy enough for the CEO’s gaze. Pro tip: Choose lightweight fabrics that won’t crease while you’re conquering your day. Nobody wants “meeting wrinkles” at a soirée. Swap & Slay: The Accessories Game: Accessories are your transformation tools. During the day, go minimal — a structured tote, simple studs, and a nude heel. But as dusk approaches, it’s your cue to switch gears. Swap your tote for a small statement clutch, change your studs for gold hoops or bold earrings, and if you dare — slip into strappy heels. Just that, and you’re red-carpet ready without breaking a sweat (or your schedule). PFAS and Fashion. PFAS stands for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances, a group of synthetic chemicals used in products like non-stick cookware, firefighting foam, tires and stain-resistant coatings. They're known as “forever chemicals” due to their persistence in the environment and in the human body. The main concerns are ⁠environmental persistence, PFAS don't break down easily, contaminating soil, water and air, and also health risks, they are linked to issues like cancer and thyroid problems. But the tide starts to turn. In California major tire manufacturers are being sued because their PFAS have poisoned river and lake waters and killed fish. Now the European Union, with Denmark and France in the lead, and several states in the USA want to ban PFAS altogether this year. Tests have been done on Chinese Shein and Temu products and many contain PFAS. So the European textile industry hopes to curtail these cheap Chinese suppliers by banning products with PFAS. Forgetting that most textiles they import, whether from China, India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Bangladesh, contain Pfas to some degree. So if the consumer needs to be protected then the textile industry, and many other industries, will have to change. What is important here is the court cases against the tire manufacturers. If the government does not do its consumer protection job properly because of the lobby from industry, then the public should indeed take these industries, and their own governments to court.

Valentines and the Chinese. I already see the kiosk thrift sellers turning their showrooms into red, Valentines is on the way. I pray that nobody is dumb enough to commit suicide because no one invited her. Invite to where? I guess everyone has his own budget, though hampers are going from 250 upwards to several thousands. Business is business. And these days we see more and more Chinese in town, not only for the galamsey, including their youngsters, and these youngsters thus naturally chase young girls. Girl look for boy, boy look for girl. To take them out for Valentines, and maybe more. Take them out to where? To a Chinese restaurant of course.

Shop right or shop wrong? If you go to Shopright Osu to buy tea you may get the following: Lipton tea, 20 pouches 50 grams for 19.99 GHC. That's 399.80 GHC per kg, say 400. So better buy a big box, 200 grams at 139 GHC. Cheaper. Cheaper? 695, say 700 GHC per kg. What? Yes, you read this correctly. And as much as supermarkets have their marketing tricks, like putting the cheapest article very low or so high that you don’t easily see it, or putting candies near the cashier so that you'll give in to your moaning kid they've now gone into actually cheating. 5 cost 5, and 10 cost 12. On purpose. It was recently reported in a European consumer protection magazine. It's on purpose. You assume that a bigger packaging is more economic, but sometimes it is not, you need to check. And as most have difficulty with calculating the supermarkets get away with it, with your money. Beware. I guess the others are just doing the same thing, and in Shoprite it is not the first time I noticed this trick. Maxmart can even out do that, the article is priced on the shelf say at 47 GHC, but the cashier prints 67. Who checks?

Ga Kenkey and dare to be different. We decided to have a bit of a soirée, dress up and serve nice food, soft sax music in the background. So we had Ga kenkey with beef and goat kebabs with Dagomba barbecue spices from Ash to get away from the rather same tasting chinchinga everyone uses, white vermouth with ice and lemon from Noilly Prat (Martini is just a vermouth brand name) Vodka (cheap brand) with ice and to finish it off Val d’Oca brut millesimato Prosecco denomazione di origine controllato and vanilla ice cream from Tipsy Gelato. Lovely evening, deep talk, and in fact more fun than an upscale restaurant. And very little cleaning up to do afterwards.

Lydia...

Do not forget to hit the subscribe button and confirm in your email inbox to get notified about our posts.

I have received requests about leaving comments/replies. For security and privacy reasons my blog is not associated with major media giants like Facebook or Twitter. I am talking with the host about a solution. for the time being, you can mail me at wunimi@proton.me

I accept invitations and payments to write about certain products or events, things, and people, but I may refuse to accept and if my comments are negative then that's what I will publish, despite your payment. This is not a political newsletter. I do not discriminate on any basis whatsoever.

Affrètement coque nue – Sanctions – Emploi du navire – Droit anglais – HCJ

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2025/2033.pdf

Un cas tordu avec plusieurs points de contentieux concernant la vente d'un pétrolier pour 13 mio $ via un bareboat qui finit mal à cause du refus d'un voyage impliquant des intervenants sous sanctions. 

C'est cette seule partie qui m'intéresse ici. 

Savory Shipping, une Sté de l'armateur grec George Gialozoglou a conclu en février 2019 une bareboat cp avec Ceto Shiping pour 36 mois, tout en conservant la gestion technique. 

A l'issue des 36 mois, la propriété du bateau serait transférée à l'affréteur pour autant que, selon la clause 39-1, ce dernier “paid all hire and any other sums due under this Charter and… all management fees and any other sums due under the Management Agreement...“. 

D'autre part, la clause 25 indiquait, amongst other, Savory shipping “...shall not be obliged to comply with the provisions of this Agreement if in the reasonable judgment ... it will expose them or their insurers, re-insurers, crew, registered owners, to any sanction … imposed by any State…” 

Je passe sur les nombreuses péripéties, non sans mentionner un addendum de décembre 2019 par lequel, entre autres, l'Iran était une zone exclue, ce qui n'empêcha jamais Ceto Shipping de continuer à y charger. 

En avril 2020, le 'Victor 1' a été sous-affrété par Ceto shipping à Imperium pour le chargement d'une cargaison d'essence iranienne à destination de Trinidad & Tobago. L'armateur a refusé d'effectuer le voyage, craignant que cela ne constitue une violation des sanctions américaines contre l'Iran, ainsi que contre le Venezuela, soupçonnant que la cargaison d'essence était in fine destinée au Venezuela, un des intervenants étant également soupçonné d'être une personne sanctionnée ayant des liens avec Maduro. 

Grosse embrouille, refus du transfert de propriété et, finalement, vente du navire aux enchères à Singapour en décembre 2023 pour ± 11 mio $ ! 

Tout est intéressant quand on aime comprendre comment ce genre d'opération tourne à la cata, mais je reviens spécifiquement à la question des sanctions. 

Dans l'affaire du 'Catalan Sea', la HCJ a reproché l'armateur d'avoir refusé de prendre une cargaison qu'il estimait problématique, bien qu'il ait abondamment documenté les liens douteux de son affréteur, ici, la HCJ, sous la plume de Dame Sara C., même si l'armateur “did not take legal advice” mais simplement “enter into discussions with other shipowner stakeholders in the Greek market as to their information” (#275) a été convaincue qu'il pouvait refuser le voyage controversé. 

La décision fait 69 pages... mais “the centre of gravity of the trial” commence  au #230 de la page 42. Miss Sara développe la question du 'reasonable judgment', et aussi s'interroge de savoir si l'armateur “make any judgment in good faith”(*). 

(23-9-25 – E&OE – Without prejudice)

A memo from the Grand Commissioner of the spectral realm…

From: The Grand Commissioner (Tobias Trench)

To: All Spectral staff

---

Right, listen up. The Commission has noticed a distinct lack of professionalism in the park. Last week, Alfred tried to haunt a smart fridge. A smart fridge! He looked like a right muppet.

There’s an indie author called Andy who is writing a novel about you all. So, I want the park to be kept in good order. Any new arrivals should be processed straight away.

It’s called ‘Dread Central’ for a reason. Everyone dreads going there because it means they’ve snuffed it. But we don’t want that coming over in his novel. The Commission requires you all to make the whole after life thing sound like an efficient and decent departure.

Clive Smith is your Spectral Operations Manager. He will ensure that the proper paperwork is filled in. And that the Ether waiting room doesn’t get too full.

I’ve asked that Andy bloke to make sure the novel is funny. But also, to keep it bloody real. I don’t want any of Sid Smithers farts getting described in detail. Or the fact that Alfred wanders off trying to scare anyone in Piddle-on-Sea he comes across.

The Spectral Commission needs to present itself as a well organised, efficient end  of life service.

End

---

—That’ll do it.

—Yeah, should do, Tobias.

—Wait. Should I mention it’s for the book?

—Bleeding obvious, ain’t it?

—Er, not really.

Authors note: Tobias Trench is the Grand Commissioner of the Spectral Commission that manages the afterlife. He is in the new novel I’m writing, entitled: ‘The Unfortunates’.

Ramón ostenta el récord nacional de llanto. Dos veces campeón, indiscutible en la federación. Pero su vida no es fácil. Este sábado defenderá nuestros colores en el campeonato mundial, en el magnífico escenario de Toronto, junto a los grandes lagos. Qué gran momento.

Una meta difícil, pero a su alcance.

Llorar en competición no es fácil. Los árbitros analizan muchos detalles. Las variables más significativas son: la duración, el tempo, la frecuencia y el gesto. Este último es clave. Los expertos dicen que es el espíritu del llanto; sin gesto, el llanto no sería un arte.

Mientras el resto de los mortales consideramos que llorar es una tragedia, en la alta competición el llanto es un arte de primerísimo nivel; y muy bien pagado. En el mundial del llanto, hay firmas de esponsorización que ofrecen millones por anunciar un colirio de ojos fabricado por un gran laboratorio, o cremas para cubrir las ojeras, casas de moda y ropa deportiva que diseñan pañuelos, bufandas, toallas y pañoletas, marcas poderosas de pañuelillos de usar y tirar, todo esto sin descontar los derechos de transmisión, aparición en espectáculos, telenovelas, películas y series duras, especializadas en la gran industria de la lágrima. En Toronto van a estar los pesos pesados. No se puede ir a improvisar.

Pero Ramón estaba pasando malos momentos. Desde hacía unos días, cuando empezaba a llorar le daba un ataque de risa, y mientras la madre -su fiel mánager- le pedía que se centrara, que expulsara el aire, que salivara o parpadeara tres veces, Ramón más se reía, soltaba carcajadas a chorro y era incapaz de articular el gesto, ni ventilar lo suficiente para mantener el tempo y la frecuencia.

Un influencer filtró la noticia y la federación se apresuró a tomar cartas en el asunto.

-Ramón -le dijo el presidente-, no nos puedes fallar, piensa en tu afición. Tienes que inundar Toronto. El país está contigo.

-Lo sé -dijo Ramón-, pero estoy acabado. Me veo tan deprimido, que no puedo sino reír. Reír y reír, qué desgracia.

Today, E broke up with me. I’ve spent the day calling her mom, my friends, and sobbing. I’m going to write out letters to her here that I won’t send her.

I’ve gone through denial and anger already today. I’m right now in bargaining. But I don’t feel that way; I feel genuine with what I have to say. I am praying that what she said and what happened was not truly what she felt. Overnight, it went from I love you, to an explosion of wanting to break up. I think it was cruel of her to ambush me by bringing three of her roommates to my house to grab her stuff, especially right before my work meeting. I don’t think that’s like her; she is kind and empathetic, and wouldn’t do some of the things she did that were excessively cruel. I am praying so hard that this isn’t actually true, but that this really is just her spiraling last night. I don’t want her to feel this way, and to feel this shitty and scared, partially because of me. I don’t think that it’s necessarily something I’m doing wrong, but I think it’s more the stuff that she is struggling with that I can help with. I know it’s not my job to I guess handle her feelings, but I love her and we are a team. I don’t want to think of a world where that’s not the case. That’s my E. I look out for her and she looks out for me. We’re in this together. Fuck I’m tearing up typing that. It kills me to think about a world where we aren’t together, but I both know that I will be ok in that world, and I just pray that she is too. I want the best for her. We have talked a lot about how it hurts her how she feels so much guilt at always being the one to fuck up and hurt me, and how I don’t fuck up the same. I don’t know how I can make her feel better about that but I will try. I love her a lot. I don’t want her to hurt. If she’s been hurting I just want to understand why and figure out how I can love her without hurting her. I’m at such a loss because I don’t know what to do. I’m not often religious but I want to beg to any higher power that she thinks of how the good times are, and how much we mean to eachother.

If I could speak to her right now, I would tell her that I’m sorry, but I cannot tell her I won’t hurt her in some way or another. If I could, if I knew what I could do to not hurt her like that, I would in a heartbeat. All I can promise is that I care about your pain just as much as mine, and I will do whatever I can to make you feel safe and secure with me. What happened hurts, but the thought of not having you in my life hurts even more. I know I am not perfect, and I know you are not perfect. You’re still my person. I know I can ask for a lot, and I’m sorry. I know I also struggle with my emotions sometimes, and know that you do too. I also know that you make me feel heard and seen and safe in so many different ways that I haven’t felt before. I apologize for not being more grateful for you. I’m realizing now that I haven’t been nearly as vocal with how much I love her, I only tell her when she is feeling like not enough. But you are so much more than enough to me E. I want to write a list of all of the things that I love about her, and things I should have said.

1. I love playing arena with you, and I love seeing how hyped you get when you clutch for us.

2. I think it’s so cute when I complain about doing bulgarians, but I take it as such a point of pride that my girlfriend has that dog in her.

3. The child in me swells with so much joy that I can’t express it when you ask to play chess with me. I know that it’s not fun to lose every game, even with odds, but you still take pride in it, and you’ve initiated that every time. I really love playing chess with you. I love seeing you get better so quickly and figure out things by yourself that I had to learn from someone else.

4. I know that it’s not a fun feeling to have someone critique your gameplay, but VOD reviewing your Lillia game was a memory I truly cherish.

5. Designing things has always been something really hard for me to do. My Minecraft builds always look like shit, and any time I try to make it look decent, I feel ashamed because it looks like what you probably built when you were 10. But our Minecraft world together is by far the most beautiful base I’ve ever seen. I know you’ve put in a lot of effort into designing it in your creative world, getting inspiration on Pinterest, and actually building it for us.

6. I like to give you shit for color-coding our chests, but I think it’s really cute.

7. I love the fact that I can give you shit for things, and that you take it in good fun. I’ve always wanted a partner I can lovingly make fun of.

8. I really love how you told me the day when the shit I gave you for your 60% keyboard was getting to you. I think our communication consistently gets better each time we talk.

9. I love how you give me a safe place to cry. It’s really hard for me to cry, and I have been getting more and more comfortable with it, thanks to you.

10. I know I can be a hard person to love. I have a lot of my walls up, and I demand a lot because I don’t know what I should expect or even ask for. You make me feel loved. Even now, even with all of the mess that’s happened, I believe that you have love for me. I understand if there is too much else that overpowers that love, and I’m not trying to guilt you; I’m just saying that the love you gave me hit my heart.

11. I have asked a lot of you. I haven’t always been reasonable with it, and please forgive me for it. I’m not a pro when it comes to navigating relationships. I want to break down again when I think about how much I’ve asked of you, and how it isn’t fair. I’ve piled things on repeatedly, and I haven’t given that same effort in acknowledging the things you’ve done, or making sure I wasn’t being unfair, and talking with you about that, not just when I’m hurting. It isn’t fair that it matters enough for me to ask that of you, regardless of your stresses, but not enough for me to talk about it when I’m not hurting and I feel good.

12. I loved explaining Palantir to you while we watched South Park together.

13. I would make a calendar of all the times I’ve taken photos of you with Hash cuddled up, sleeping together. He sits guard, watching over you when you nap.

14. I know we could have talked about it earlier, and I know we could have handled it differently. But over winter break, when you were in so much pain because of me, you endured it for my sake. I know that we both would do things differently, of course, but just knowing how much I meant to you.

15. I’ve had plenty of times where I’ve been mad or frustrated. A lot of those moments are during arguments we have. But when I see you crying or hurting, all of that anger I feel flushes out of my brain. I’m not going to comfort you because I feel like I have to, or like I’m putting my feelings aside, but genuinely because they dissolve when I see you hurting. You’re a part of me, and your pain is my pain. Immediately in that moment I think about if any of the stupid (or even not stupid reasons) I’m mad is worth you crying, and before I can form the thought the answer is no. I don’t comfort you because I have to, but because I want to.

16. I am so happy when you come with me to V’s events, since you’re much more cultured and refined, and that’s something I am so clueless about.

17. At the lunch with my boss and new teammate, I knew what to do a bit more with my fork, knife, and cloth because of you.

18. At 24 years old, I have finally learned that you hold cups with your right hand. All thanks to you, I don’t make a clown of myself at nicer places.

19. I ask so damn much of you, not just emotionally. I ask you to try different things, I’m stubborn with that sometimes – like with the beer I got at the Super Bowl event. You indulge me on them, even though you’re also stubborn. But I guess I matter more, and you don’t hold it against me.

20. When we went to Six Flags, I remember when I was filling up the Icee cup. I was fully in the wrong, and I wanted to fill up the cup with the straw in it or something dumb. You told me to do it the right way, and I was being a bitch about it, and I refused. That (rightfully) annoyed you, and then I went to do it, and I immediately realized I was in the wrong. I don’t think I even properly apologized, but you let it go. To be fully honest, if I were in your shoes, that would have stuck with me way longer than it did for you. You forgive me so much more easily, and I don’t acknowledge that enough.

21. Thanksgiving and that break time always hurt me so fucking badly. This is the first year I’ve felt like I’m happy to look back at it. It’s not fair that this is only one number. I’ve never felt more seen during this time. I couldn’t even put into words how much you gave me. I spent my whole life looking from the outside in, and you and your family brought me in. No matter what, I will forever be so grateful for that.

22. I have to choke back tears every time I think about the surprise birthday. I didn’t know a love like that was possible until then. I used to always think growing up about how being surprised for your birthday is such a level of love that I couldn’t even dream of. Having people who love you so much that you don’t even have to ask, and they want to go through all that effort just for you? The worst part is that if you ever ask, then it ruins some of that magic. Even if I mention that it’s something I would have wanted. I never once mentioned this to you, and it still happened. That magic is something I’ll forever hold.

23. I know that you had a shitty childhood. I know that you had a lot of things that held you back, like e-dating and VRChat. I can’t blame you for any of it, honestly. I would have done the same if I had access to them. I admire you so much for having that setback and still pushing so hard to become the person I see. Out of the blue, saying that you wanted to cut ties with your exes caught me so off guard. I have felt so much more secure since then, and I thank you for that. That was fully your initiative and a sign of the person you have grown from.

24. The picture on our server is when we watched Kakegurui, and you fell asleep on my chest. You look so calm and at peace, and I feel so insanely wanted and loved there.

25. It annoyed me at first when you cough with your mouth open, but it feels like an inside joke now.

26. I remember how much you hated 67 when I first mentioned it, and now it’s almost a ritual for us. Whenever I hear about it or see it, I think of you.

27. Mazdas, Cybertrucks, Buggies, Mach-E’s, Priuses. I’ve always joked about wanting a girlfriend who would hit me, but you hit pretty hard. (I still want it)

28. The road trip we had was such a core memory for me. I got mad at you, frustrated and overwhelmed, but I wouldn’t have wanted any other navigator. I don’t like long drives like that, but I’d gladly do that over and over again with you.

29. Whenever you laugh at “my hard so life,” I think it’s stupid, but then I see how much you giggle at it, and I then think it’s adorable.

30. I swear I fart more often and louder because of you. I’ve gone from silently farting in a separate room to mid-sentence trying to blow it as loud as possible, and I’ve never felt safer doing that.

31. You made me feel safe enough to do the bucket list thing.

32. We shit infront of each other. Can you think of that for a second? How incredibly safe and vulnerable you are with someone to do that. I wouldn’t imagine doing that with anyone but you.

33. The double-headed shower was fully worth it. I LOVE showers, and the fact that you let me hog the water on my back and never complain is so sweet of you. I’m glad we both get to have it now.

34. I think we’ve crossed the point where you’ve driven towards me for longer than I have for you. I really appreciate that so much. I know it’s not fun to make those drives, and I know that the gas costs a lot. I also know how stressful it is for you, especially at night, and you still make that drive. Thank you.

35. I’ve never had someone that I’ve trusted as much with Hash. He’s my everything, and I trust you with that.

36. When we cuddle together, I get to be in heaven with both you and Hash cuddling me. That’s truly heaven, I have no other words for it.

37. I found out recently that I could have gotten the bedjet for free. I was also on the fence for so long about getting a PS5, which was the same price as the bedjet. I still, in a HEARTBEAT, would get the bedjet 1000 times out of 1000. I get to cuddle up to you no matter what.

38. I’ve always wondered where lore from games comes, and I think it’s from people like you. Your Sims generations are so creative, and I wish I could go back and spend more time hearing about the other stories. I never even got to read the instagram, and that’s my fault, I should have been way more proactive the way that you’ve been for my interests.

39. Watching AoT in schezuan house will stick with me for so long. It freaks me out how some of your theories are dead on, and I think I did a good job of tricking you into thinking they weren’t. I hope you finish the show.

40. I know that Outer Wilds doesn’t seem fun, and I genuinely do not blame you at ALL for never having the urge to do that when we could be doing ANYTHING else. But you still did. And you even kept asking to do it, and remembering. You absolutely crushed me in showing interest in eachothers things.

41. You come with me to social events with people, and it’s so nice to have you as my oasis I can go to no matter what.

42. You’re the perfect blend of competitive, but also not to the point where I actually have to worry about your feelings if I beat you. I get to be competitive too, and I know we’re having fun.

43. You’ve so proudly posted me on your stories, your bios, and I really love having someone who wants to show me off like that.

44. I genuinely find your body so fucking attractive. Even without your personality behind it, I think you’re primarily hot to me. When you add in your personality, I can’t handle it sometimes.

45. You make me feel so fucking safe with sex. I have so much baggage there, and that’s something you’ve helped me through, and thank you so much for that.

46. You started therapy for me, and you even fought for it. That’s so much to ask for from someone, and I couldn’t have forced you to do it. Everyone tells me that I can’t change you, and it can only happen if you want to, and I have proof that you do. I don’t doubt that you want to.

47. I have had my depressive episodes, and I know that I put so much strain on us because of that. You handled them in stride and tanked it, all without making me feel guilty or like a burden, even though I absolutely was. That’s way more than I could have asked for.

I’m forcing myself to stop here because I know I’ll need sleep to not want to kill myself tomorrow morning. I will continue.

Ich greife einen Gedanken auf, der mir seit einiger Zeit nicht mehr aus dem Kopf geht. Er stammt von Robert Spaemann, einem katholischen Philosophen, und ist ebenso schlicht wie unbequem: Bildung ist nicht Ausbildung. Ein gebildeter Mensch ist nicht einfach jemand mit viel Wissen oder mit einer gut verwertbaren Qualifikation, sondern jemand, der Zusammenhänge versteht, urteilen kann und sein Wissen in ein umfassenderes Verständnis von Welt und Mensch einordnet. Bildung, so Spaemann, ist Orientierung. Je länger ich diesen Satz mit mir herumtrage, desto deutlicher wird mir, wie sehr er quer zu vielen gegenwärtigen Debatten steht.

Wer heute über Defizite in Wissenschaft, Politik oder Medien klagt, spricht meist von fehlender Expertise, von mangelnder Professionalität oder von ungenügender Kompetenz. Das klingt zunächst plausibel. Doch bei genauerem Hinsehen beschleicht mich der Verdacht, dass diese Diagnose zu kurz greift. Fachwissen ist so verfügbar wie nie zuvor. Funktionale Fähigkeiten lassen sich erwerben, zertifizieren und laufend aktualisieren. Und dennoch bleibt ein Unbehagen. Was oft fehlt, ist nicht Information, sondern Einordnung. Nicht Können, sondern Urteilskraft. Nicht Eloquenz, sondern #Bildung.

Diese begriffliche Unschärfe ist mehr als ein akademisches Detail. Wenn Bildung und Ausbildung, Kompetenz und Orientierung, Wissen und Verstehen in Eins fallen, verändert sich stillschweigend, was wir von Menschen in verantwortungsvollen Rollen erwarten. Dann genügt es, etwas effizient zu beherrschen, ohne es in einen grösseren Zusammenhang stellen zu können. Genau an diesem Punkt gewinnt Spaemanns Unterscheidung ihre Schärfe. Sie ist ein Massstab für die Gegenwart.

Die Verwechslung

Gerade an der Debatte über generative künstliche Intelligenz zeigt sich, wie sehr wir Bildung und Ausbildung verwechseln. Vor diesem Hintergrund erscheint mir auch diese Debatte in einem anderen Licht. Meist wird die #KI als Bedrohung oder als Effizienzwerkzeug verhandelt. Entweder fürchten wir den Verlust menschlicher Fähigkeiten, oder wir feiern Produktivitätsgewinne. Beides bleibt an der Oberfläche. Denn KI adressiert zunächst Ausbildung, nicht Bildung. Sie liefert Informationen, strukturiert Texte, schlägt Lösungen vor. Was sie nicht kann, ist verstehen, urteilen oder Verantwortung tragen. Bildung lässt sich nicht automatisieren.

Und doch wäre es zu einfach, daraus eine kulturkritische Abwehrhaltung abzuleiten. Gerade in Bildungszusammenhängen kann KI, klug eingesetzt, Räume eröffnen. Nicht als Antwortmaschine, sondern als Gesprächspartnerin. Nicht als Ersatz für Erfahrung, sondern als Anlass zur Reflexion. Wenn sie dazu beiträgt, Fragen zu vertiefen, Perspektiven zu wechseln oder Denkbewegungen sichtbar zu machen, kann sie Breitenbildung unterstützen. Vorausgesetzt, wir verwechseln das Werkzeug nicht mit dem Ziel.

Zwei Stimmen

An dieser Stelle drängt sich mir eine andere Stimme auf, die in der medialen Berichterstattung und in den sozialen Medien der letzten Monate kaum zu überhören ist. Sie klingt ganz anders. Drängend, appellativ und leistungsorientiert. Ihr Kern lautet: Wer jetzt früh versteht, früh nutzt und früh adaptiert, verschafft sich einen entscheidenden Vorteil. KI wird hier nicht als Bildungsfrage, sondern als Karrierethema verhandelt. #Lernen bedeutet vor allem, schneller zu sein als andere. Wer eine Stunde pro Tag experimentiert, sich keine Scheu vor grossen Aufgaben leistet und bereit ist, Teile seiner Arbeit zu automatisieren, wird vorne mitspielen.

Ich halte diese Perspektive nicht für falsch. Sie ist realistisch, wirksam und für viele Menschen attraktiv. Sie trifft einen Nerv unserer Arbeitswelt. Und doch irritiert sie mich. Denn implizit transportiert sie ein bestimmtes Verständnis von Lernen und Bildung. Lernen wird zur Anpassungsleistung, Wissen zur Ressource und die KI zum Beschleuniger. Orientierung spielt dabei kaum eine Rolle. Entscheidend ist, ob etwas funktioniert.

Hier liegt für mich eine zentrale Spannung. Auf der einen Seite steht ein funktionales Bildungsverständnis, das auf Effizienz, Nutzen und individuelle Positionierung ausgerichtet ist. Auf der anderen Seite ein bildungstheoretisches Verständnis, das Lernen als Verhältnis zu sich selbst und zur Welt begreift. Beide Perspektiven schliessen sich nicht aus. Aber sie lassen sich auch nicht nahtlos ineinander überführen. Was verlieren wir aus dem Blick, wenn Bildung auf „Frühsein“ reduziert wird?

Was bleibt

Gerade deshalb scheint mir die Frage nach KI weniger eine technische als eine bildungstheoretische zu sein. Sie zwingt uns, unsere Begriffe zu klären. In Elternhaus, Schule und Erwachsenenbildung entscheidet sich nicht, wie leistungsfähig KI ist, sondern wie wir sie rahmen. Ob schnelle Antworten zählen oder gute Fragen. Ob Output oder Orientierung im Vordergrund steht. Ein Beispiel: Wenn Schülerinnen und Schüler mit KI einen Text schreiben, können sie entweder lernen, wie man ein Werkzeug bedient – oder wie man mit diesem Werkzeug denkt, zweifelt und urteilt. Der Unterschied liegt nicht in der Technologie, sondern in der pädagogischen Haltung.

Eine gewisse Gelassenheit hilft dabei. Technologische Umbrüche verlaufen selten gleichmässig. Sie sind fragmentarisch, widersprüchlich und oft langsamer, als es der öffentliche Diskurs vermuten lässt. Nicht alles verändert sich gleichzeitig, nicht alles sofort. Der Himmel fällt uns nicht auf den Kopf. Aber Übergangszeiten haben es in sich. Sie verlangen nach Menschen, die Zusammenhänge sehen, Unsicherheiten aushalten und Verantwortung übernehmen können. Mit anderen Worten: nach gebildeten Persönlichkeiten.

Vielleicht liegt hier der eigentliche Prüfstein der KI-Debatte. Nicht darin, wie schnell Modelle besser werden, sondern darin, ob wir unsere Unterscheidungen schärfen. Spaemanns Satz wirkt auf mich dabei wie eine Zumutung – aber vielleicht ist gerade diese Zumutung heilsam in einer Zeit, die nach schnellen Antworten verlangt. Bildung ist Orientierung. Wenn das stimmt, dann verschärft KI nicht primär ein Technikproblem, sondern ein Bildungsproblem. Und die Antwort darauf lässt sich nicht automatisieren. Sie beginnt dort, wo wir uns die Zeit nehmen, über unsere Begriffe nachzudenken.

---

💬 Kommentieren (nur für write.as-Accounts)

---

Bildquelle Pieter Bruegel d. Ä. (1525/30–1569): Grosser Turmbau zu Babel, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Wien, Public Domain.

Disclaimer Teile dieses Texts wurden mit Deepl Write (Korrektorat und Lektorat) überarbeitet. Für die Recherche in den erwähnten Werken/Quellen und in meinen Notizen wurde NotebookLM von Google verwendet.

Topic #Selbstbetrachtungen | #Maschinenwelten

Demokratisering av teknologi?

En av mulighetene med generativ KI jeg synes er veldig spennende er muligheten for at mennesker uten teknisk bakgrunn skal kunne lage prototyper på verktøy og produkter de savner. Det kan være snakk om verktøy tilpasset nevrodivergens eller noen som har en utfordring på jobb de vet hvordan kunne vært fikset med riktig verktøy. Kodeverktøy hvor du programmerer ved å skrive eller lese inn naturlig språk kan kanskje bidra til at flere kan bidra til å utvikle digitale produkter.

Kan “hvem som helst” nå lage en app?

Før jul testet jeg forskjellige verktøy som lar deg kode ved hjelp av en agent og som ikke krever at du setter opp fancy greier på maskinen din, aka tilpasset folk som ikke har en naturlig tilbøyelighet til å programmere. Jeg ble imponert, men tenkte det ikke helt var der at produksjonsklare apper kunne bli resultatet. Men jeg vet også at utviklingen går raskt og da jeg så reklame for Replits buildathon hvor du kan konkurrere om å levere en mobilapp laget på Replit ble jeg fristet til å delta.

Rekruttering av et offer

Jeg kan jo programmere. Hvis jeg vibekoder en app er det ikke egentlig så imponerende. Selv om jeg snakker med en KI agent kan jeg såpass mye om programmering at det ikke helt er det samme som når noen uten erfaring gjør det. Jeg kontaktet der for Oda Rygh. Hun liker å lære nye ting og har erfaring med nettdebatt. Det er nyttig i denne sammenhengen (mer om det senere).

Intro til Replit

Jeg tok en tur til Odas hjemmekontor og på et par timer var vi godt i gang på Replit. Eller det vil si, Oda var godt i gang. Det er lett å bli med på slike plattformer og hvis du er vant til chatbotter føles det ganske likt ut å skravle med et verktøy som Replit. Replit har også mange andre muligheter, som at du kan be om å bruke et spesielt rammeverk og du har også mulighet til å se på koden direkte, kjøre ting i terminalen og mye mer som utviklere liker å ha tilgang til. Disse verktøyene forstyrret ikke Oda nevneverdig, så designet passer også godt for nybegynnere.

Tidsbruk

KI-agenten hos Replit har brukt omtrent ti timer på å gjøre ting, hvilket betyr at Oda nok har gitt Replit mer eller mindre sin oppmerksomhet i kanskje 20 timer inne på Replit. I tillegg skjønte Oda raskt at det kan være lurt å bruke andre chattetjenester som ChatGPT eller Claude til å be om hjelp til å prompte Replit for da sparer man credits inne på Replit og du slipper å resette kontekstvinduet midt i noe. Hvor lang tid Oda brukte vet bare Oda. La oss si at Oda brukte en drøy arbeidsuke av sin fritid på dette. Oda er en helt!

En gjeng overivrige juniorer

Noen beskrev vibekoding som å prøve å administerere en gjeng overivrige juniorprogrammere. Ikke bare mangler de oversikten, de gjør også masse andre greier enn det du ber om for å imponere. Noen ganger sletter de litt uten å helt kunne forklare hvorfor. Det er absolutt litt slik med Replit. I tillegg er KI agenter gjerne litt kranglete. Oda og jeg måtte begge argumentere hardt for hvorfor vi ikke ville ha kanji som ikoner på Android. “Det er fint å lære seg nye språk” kunne f.eks agenten melde. Joda, men ikke i denne sammenhengen ... En del av timene brukt på dette prosjektet kunne vært unngått om agenten hadde kranglet litt mindre.

Sikkerhetshull

Jeg ville ikke åpne for offentlig testing via TestFlight og lignende uten å sjekke koden litt grundigere. Jeg valgte å laste over koden til GitHub og brukte Snyk for å lete etter åpenbare svakheter. Snyk fant. Jeg kjørte på videre i ekte vibekoding-stil og kopierte inn oppsummeringene fra Snyk og sa “please fix”. Replit fixet. Jeg gjorde en ny commit og Snyk kjørte automatisk på mitt repository igjen. Snyk fant ikke flere problemer etter at sikkerhetshullene var fikset.

Kodekvalitet

Jeg ville gjerne også få et inntrykk av kodens kvalitet. Siden jeg ikke har programmert i React før og tross alt kjørte dette som et prosjekt for å lære meg siste skrik innen vibing, så koblet jeg SonarCube til mitt repository med koden på GitHub og kjørte automatiske analyser. Dette er det jeg lærte: -Kode gjentas -Forskjellige kodestiler -Vanskelig å vedlikeholde pga unødvendig (?) kompleksitet -Koden var skrevet slik at den kunne gi ytelsesproblemer

Bortsett fra det med ytelse gadd jeg ikke fikse resten. Det er framtidige Grys problem skulle vi faktisk bestemme oss for å lansere denne appen skikkelig. Ytelsesproblemene fikset jeg ved å lime inn oppsummeringen fra SonarCube og jeg verifiserte ved å kjøre appen på noen forskjellige enheter ved hjelp av ExpoGo og sjekket at det var en forbedring.

Lærdom

Ja, hvis du har en klar ide om hva du vil lage og orker å krangle og bruker nok penger på credits kan du absolutt klare å lage en app uten noe særlig kunnskap om programmering. De fleste vil nok også lære litt om hvordan programmer fungerer ved å holde på lenge nok. Per i dag vil jeg anbefale å i tillegg bruke et par verktøy i tillegg for å forbedre koden. Snyk er et eksempel på et verktøy som er fint til å fange opp sikkerhetshull og SonarCube kan hjelpe deg finne ut hvordan du skal be agenten gjøre koden enklere å vedlikeholde. Det finnes sikkert mange slike verktøy på markedet, jeg plukket bare noe jeg kjente litt fra før av. Og det var ganske gøy! Kommer noen av oss til å prøve å leve av mobilapper? Neppe. Vil jeg gjøre noe lignende igjen? Det kan godt hende.

ふとした瞬間に、急に担任の先生の名前を思い出すことがある。すると不思議なことに、その先生の姿と一緒に、教室の机の配置や、クラスメイトたちの顔ぶれ、さらには遠く離れた公園の風景までもが、滝のように一気にあふれ出してくる。まるでその記憶が、身体の奥深くに直接触れて、細胞を揺らし、翌日の身長にまで影響を与えるような、そんな体験だった。

でも、その先生を思い出すこと自体は、そう頻繁にあるわけじゃない。今朝も、出社のために新宿へ向かっている最中だった。身体はやはり拒絶反応を起こしていて、重たい足取りのまま、みんなと同じ顔つきで方向を示した。

この現状を変える方法はないかと、遠い過去から、まだ記録すらされていない未来の果てまで、俺の身体が栄養を燃やして、全力でサーチをかけてくれる。そんなとき、過去の記憶をたどっていくと、なぜか焦点が「先生」に合うのだ。 不思議なことに、そのときの先生はいつも決まってグレーのベストを着ている。

頭の中で迷路に迷い込んでいたら、ふと目の前に高級そうなカメラを構えたおじさんがいて、新宿の街を撮っていた。パシャリ、パシャリとシャッターを切っては、時折カメラを下ろし、まるで何か脅威を目撃したかのように、口をぽかんと開けていた。ゴジラでも現れたんか。

毛並みのいい犬が散歩されている。飼い主の顔ははっきり見えているのに、なぜか認識できない。 「友達の奥さんがさ、いつも服くれるんだよね」
そんな断片的なセリフが頭をかすめる。でも、体調も精神も底をついている今の俺には、それを受け止める余裕がない。

「人間の嫌な部分を見せた上で誠実さを示すべきだ」
そんな、誰かに何かを言われたときのために用意していた返しを、そいつに頭の中で鋭く放ってみるも、むなしく空に溶けていった。 そもそも、誰に何を言われたときの返しだったのか思い出せない。

「人が人に悪口言いたいわけないやん」
たしか、そいつにはこうも言った気がする。 でも、そんな断片だけ覚えているもんだから、結局はそのセリフを言いたかっただけなんじゃないかと、自分にあきれてしまう。

今日は妻の弁当がなかったので、素焼きアーモンドとみかんだけを持って、昼にガパオライスを弁当屋で買った。白身がカリッと揚がった目玉焼きが上に乗っていて、それがまた美味しそうだった。この目玉焼きは好きだ。でも、家でこれを作るには大量の油が必要で、その後の掃除を思うと気が遠くなる。だから、こうして弁当で手軽に食べられるのはありがたい。 ガパオライス自体は弁当屋の雰囲気に反して辛かったので、みかんを持ってきて良かった。

さて、いつ休憩から戻るか。 そう思いながら、体の外側と内側が同じような温度になったかと思ったら、 「今から10000秒間、目をつぶります」
そんな言葉がふと頭に浮かんだ。

10000秒って何分だ？と計算してみたら、166分40秒だった。そんなに目をつぶっていたら、他の社員に心配されて、寺院の倉庫か何かにしまわれてしまいそうだ。だから、自分の中で時間を圧縮して、10000秒に該当する、16秒ほど目を閉じて、部屋全体のレイアウトを頭の中で思い浮かべた。そして、自分が今どこにいるのか、心の中でピンを立てた。

ふと、座った席に紙が置いてあったので、深く息を吐いて、それを遠くへ飛ばしておいた。

明日は休みだから、朝起きた時のカーテンがきっと美しい。

You have never walked anonymously. You may have believed otherwise, pulling a hood over your head or choosing the busy side of the street, but the truth has been catching up for years. The way you shift your weight from one foot to the other, the cadence of your stride, the particular rhythm of your fingers on a keyboard, even the micro-fluctuations in your voice when you order a coffee: all of these patterns are, increasingly, as identifiable as your fingerprint. And unlike your fingerprint, you leave them everywhere, involuntarily, continuously, without ever pressing your thumb to glass.

Artificial intelligence systems can now identify individuals through subtle behavioural patterns and voice characteristics with startling accuracy. Gait recognition software deployed on the streets of Beijing and Shanghai can pick you out of a crowd from 50 metres away, even with your back turned and your face completely covered. Voice biometric systems in banking can authenticate your identity from a few seconds of speech. Wi-Fi signals bouncing off your body as you walk through a room can betray your identity through walls. The question is no longer whether these technologies work. It is what their proliferation means for the very concept of being unknown in a public space, and whether truly private human interaction remains possible in an age of pervasive, ambient identification.

The Expanding Biometric Frontier Beyond the Face

For over a decade, the surveillance debate has centred on facial recognition. Cities have banned it. Activists have marched against it. Researchers like Joy Buolamwini at the MIT Media Lab have exposed its profound racial biases, demonstrating through her landmark 2018 Gender Shades study that commercial facial analysis systems from IBM, Microsoft, and Face++ misclassified darker-skinned women at rates as high as 47 per cent while achieving error rates below 1 per cent for lighter-skinned men. Her work, co-authored with Timnit Gebru, catalysed a reckoning that led every audited US-based company to stop selling facial recognition technology to law enforcement by 2020.

But while the world was arguing about faces, a quieter revolution was unfolding. Behavioural biometrics, the science of identifying people through how they move, type, speak, and interact with the physical world, has advanced rapidly and without the same degree of public scrutiny. Unlike facial recognition, which requires a camera pointed at your face, behavioural biometrics can operate at a distance, through obstacles, and without the subject's knowledge or cooperation. This makes it, in many respects, a far more consequential threat to anonymity than the technology that has dominated headlines.

The gait biometrics market was valued at USD 1.25 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach USD 3.41 billion by 2032, growing at a compound annual growth rate of 13.38 per cent. Security agencies accounted for roughly 44 per cent of that market in 2024, with Asia-Pacific expected to see the fastest growth at 15.15 per cent annually through 2032. These are not speculative projections from fringe analysts; they reflect sustained investment by governments and corporations in technologies that identify you not by what you look like, but by what you do.

Gait Recognition Comes of Age

The idea that every person walks differently is not new. Forensic investigators have long known that gait is distinctive. What is new is the ability of AI systems to extract that distinctiveness from ordinary surveillance footage and match it against databases at scale.

The Chinese AI company Watrix, incubated by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, has developed gait recognition software that extracts a person's silhouette from video and analyses its movement to create a model of how that person walks. According to Watrix CEO Huang Yongzhen, the technology has been trialled by police in Beijing, Shanghai, and Chongqing, and a pilot system operates in Hubei and Guangdong provinces. The system can identify individuals from up to 50 metres away, from any angle, even when faces are covered and in darkness. “With facial recognition people need to look into a camera,” Huang told the South China Morning Post. “Cooperation is not needed for them to be recognised by our technology.”

The accuracy Watrix claims is striking: up to 96 per cent. The company, which was inspired by a US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) study, has been in discussions with security firms in Singapore, India, Russia, the Netherlands, and the Czech Republic. Security officials in China's Xinjiang province, where the Uyghur Muslim population faces intense surveillance, have also expressed interest. The technology is not merely supplementary to existing surveillance; it fills the gaps that facial recognition cannot reach. It operates in conditions where faces are obscured, where lighting is poor, and where subjects are unaware they are being watched. Every person's posture, Huang has stated, is unique, like a fingerprint, and gait recognition is capable of identifying targets from any angle.

Nor is Watrix alone. In September 2024, NEC Corporation launched a gateless biometric authentication system capable of authenticating 100 people per minute while they are in motion. The system, initially deployed at NEC's Tokyo headquarters in July 2024, combines face recognition with gait-based matching technology to identify individuals in crowded areas without requiring them to stop or present credentials. NEC, which has been ranked first in face recognition benchmark tests by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology since 2009, has deployed its biometric technology in more than 50 countries and across 80 airports globally. The new system is being offered in Japan, the United States, and Singapore, and uses deep learning to re-identify tracked individuals even after they pass behind obstructions or through dense crowds.

The Voice That Gives You Away

Your voice is another behavioural signature that AI systems are learning to read with uncomfortable precision. Voice biometrics analyse characteristics including pitch, tone, cadence, and the physical properties of your vocal tract to create a unique voiceprint. Financial institutions have been early adopters: customers can authenticate transactions simply by speaking. The technology is marketed as frictionless and secure, a way to eliminate passwords and PINs. But a voiceprint, once captured, is not a password. It cannot be changed if compromised. And the infrastructure for capturing voice data is already ubiquitous: every smartphone, every smart speaker, every customer service line.

But the same technology that verifies your identity can also compromise it. Voice recordings are biometric identifiers as sensitive as fingerprints or retinal scans, yet they can be captured from a distance, harvested from voicemail messages, or scraped from social media posts. According to the 2024 Javelin Identity Fraud Study, American consumers lost more than USD 47 billion to identity fraud that year, with AI-generated synthetic identity fraud and voice cloning driving much of that figure. A survey by BioCatch found that 91 per cent of US banks are reconsidering voice biometric authentication due to AI cloning risks.

The threat is not theoretical. In April 2025, Hong Kong police dismantled a deepfake scam ring that used AI-generated video and cloned voice attacks to open accounts at HSBC, resulting in losses exceeding HK 1.5 billion, approximately USD 193.2 million. The UK government has published a briefing note on the ethical issues arising from public sector use of biometric voice recognition technology, acknowledging the tensions between convenience, security, and privacy. Some institutions store biometric voice templates indefinitely or share them with third-party vendors for AI training purposes, often without the knowledge of the individuals whose voices are on file.

The US Department of Justice has affirmed a broad definition of biometric identifiers that encompasses facial images, voiceprints and patterns, retina and iris scans, palm and fingerprints, and behavioural data such as gait and keyboard usage patterns. This definitional expansion matters because it signals that regulators are beginning to recognise what technologists have known for some time: the body is a broadcasting device, and everything it broadcasts can be recorded, analysed, and matched to an identity.

The Invisible Biometric Layer

Beyond gait and voice, there exists an entire category of behavioural biometrics that most people never consider. Keystroke dynamics, the study of how you type, can identify individuals based on the timing between key presses, the duration for which each key is held, and the rhythm of your overall typing pattern. These measurements, captured at millisecond precision, create a biometric template that is unique to each person and extremely difficult to replicate.

Research published in Discover Applied Sciences in 2025 highlights that keystroke dynamics can be used for continuous, real-time authentication, with any deviation from established typing patterns triggering an alert for possible unauthorised access. A 2024 study published in Sensors demonstrated that deep learning architectures combining convolutional and recurrent neural networks achieve high effectiveness in identifying users based on typing patterns. Forensic applications are also emerging: regardless of the number of machines a person uses, their typing pattern persists, making keystroke dynamics a potential tool for identifying anonymous online activity.

The transparency of this technology is part of what makes it so consequential. Keystroke dynamics require no specialised hardware. They operate via backend software implementation, and in most cases users are entirely unaware they are being profiled. This passive, invisible collection of behavioural data represents a fundamentally different kind of surveillance from a camera on a pole or a guard at a door. It is ambient, continuous, and nearly impossible to evade. Research from MDPI in 2023 also found that keystroke authentication is influenced by the language being typed, meaning bilingual users produce distinct profiles for each language, further enriching the data available for identification.

Wi-Fi Signals as a Surveillance Medium

Perhaps the most unsettling frontier in behavioural identification is the use of ordinary Wi-Fi signals to detect, track, and identify people. Wi-Fi sensing exploits the way radio signals interact with human bodies: as you move through a space, you cause reflections, refractions, and attenuations in the Wi-Fi signal, and these disturbances encode information about your body shape, movement patterns, and activities.

A comprehensive 2024 survey published in ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks documents how researchers have used Channel State Information from Wi-Fi signals to identify individuals based on their unique gait patterns, achieving accuracy rates above 90 per cent. Unlike camera-based systems, Wi-Fi sensing works through walls, in complete darkness, and without requiring any device to be carried by the subject. The technology leverages existing infrastructure, requiring only standard Wi-Fi access points and receiving devices.

Research published in Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence demonstrated human activity recognition through walls using deep learning models applied to Wi-Fi CSI data. The PA-CSI model, which combines phase and amplitude analysis with attention mechanisms, has achieved accuracy rates of up to 99.9 per cent on benchmark datasets. A specialised system called WiFind can detect, localise, and estimate body pose through walls, debris, and smoke, using nodes costing under USD 150 each.

The implications are stark. A person walking through a building equipped with standard Wi-Fi infrastructure could, in principle, be continuously tracked and identified without any visible surveillance equipment, without their knowledge, and without any possibility of covering their face or altering their appearance to avoid detection. Wi-Fi technology has evolved from its initial 802.11 standard to Wi-Fi 6 and the anticipated Wi-Fi 7, with each generation improving the resolution and sensitivity of sensing capabilities. The physical world is becoming readable in ways that were previously confined to science fiction.

Regulation Struggles to Keep Pace

The regulatory response to behavioural biometric surveillance has been fragmented and reactive, consistently trailing the technology it seeks to govern. The most significant legislative development has been the European Union's AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), which entered into force on 1 August 2024 and began enforcing prohibitions on certain AI systems from 2 February 2025.

Article 5 of the AI Act prohibits real-time remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for law enforcement, with limited exceptions. It bans AI systems that scrape facial images from the internet or CCTV footage, and prohibits biometric categorisation systems that deduce race, political opinions, religious beliefs, or sexual orientation from biometric data. Violations carry fines of up to 35 million euros or 7 per cent of global annual turnover, whichever is higher.

Yet the Act contains significant exceptions for law enforcement, allowing real-time biometric identification for targeted searches of victims of abduction or trafficking, prevention of imminent threats, and prosecution of serious crimes, all subject to judicial authorisation. These carve-outs have drawn criticism from organisations like European Digital Rights (EDRi), which argues they may legitimise the very practices the Act purports to ban. As a Stanford Law School analysis noted, despite omitting an outright ban on facial recognition in publicly accessible spaces, the AI Act will probably show its full potential in the years after its entry into force.

In the United States, Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act remains the strongest state-level protection, granting individuals a private right of action and statutory damages of USD 1,000 per negligent violation and USD 5,000 per intentional violation. BIPA class action settlements totalled more than USD 206 million in 2024, including the landmark Clearview AI settlement in which class members received a 23 per cent equity stake in the company, valued at approximately USD 51.75 million. In August 2024, Illinois amended BIPA to limit damages to one violation per person regardless of how many times data was collected, a change that contributed to a sharp decline in new filings. Clearview AI itself had amassed a database of more than 60 billion facial images scraped from social media platforms, news websites, and other publicly accessible online sources, prompting the wave of litigation.

San Francisco became the first US city to ban government use of facial recognition in May 2019, with Supervisor Aaron Peskin declaring, “We all support good policing but none of us want to live in a police state.” Yet even this landmark ordinance had limits: it carved out exceptions for federal facilities and did not apply to private businesses. Moreover, in the five years since the ban, San Francisco police admitted to circumventing it on six separate occasions.

The UK's Information Commissioner's Office launched its AI and biometrics strategy in June 2025, focusing on situations where risks are highest and public concern is clearest. The ICO plans to set a high threshold of lawfulness for AI systems that infer subjective traits, intentions, or emotions based on physical or behavioural characteristics. Public polling cited in the strategy found that 54 per cent of UK adults have concerns about facial recognition technology impacting civil liberties, and that concern about AI use for welfare eligibility has risen from 44 per cent to 59 per cent between 2022 and 2025.

When the Wrong Person Gets Caught

The dangers of these systems are not abstract. In January 2020, Robert Williams, a Black man living in Farmington Hills, Michigan, was arrested outside his home in front of his wife and two young daughters by Detroit police. He was detained for thirty hours in an overcrowded, dirty cell. The arrest was based on a facial recognition match from a blurry surveillance image of a shoplifting suspect at a Shinola store in Detroit. Williams was actually the ninth-best match in the system's results, and detectives had not investigated his whereabouts before making the arrest.

Williams' case, brought to public attention by the ACLU and the University of Michigan Law School's Civil Rights Litigation Initiative, became the first publicly reported instance of a false facial recognition match leading to a wrongful arrest. On 28 June 2024, the parties reached a groundbreaking settlement that established the nation's strongest police department policies constraining law enforcement's use of facial recognition, including a prohibition on arrests based solely on facial recognition results and mandatory training on the technology's risks and its higher misidentification rates for people of colour.

Williams' case was one of three known wrongful arrests in Detroit where police relied on facial recognition technology. All three individuals wrongfully arrested were Black. This pattern underscores the findings of Buolamwini's Gender Shades study and raises a critical question about behavioural biometrics more broadly: if the training data and deployment contexts of gait recognition, voice identification, and other behavioural systems reproduce the same biases, the consequences for marginalised communities could be severe. The Pew Research Center found in a 2022 survey that 28 per cent of Black adults said police would definitely make more false arrests if facial recognition were widely adopted, compared with just 11 per cent of white adults.

Surveillance and the Death of Free Assembly

The surveillance theorist and Harvard professor Shoshana Zuboff has described surveillance capitalism as “the unilateral claiming of private human experience as free raw material for translation into behavioural data.” Her framework, articulated in The Age of Surveillance Capitalism (2019), identifies a fundamental shift in which human experiences are extracted, computed, and sold as prediction products. “We are not surveillance capitalism's 'customers,'” Zuboff writes. “We are the sources of surveillance capitalism's crucial surplus.”

When behavioural identification systems operate in public spaces, they do not merely observe; they transform public space itself. Research consistently demonstrates that surveillance produces measurable “chilling effects” on freedom of expression, assembly, and political participation. A qualitative study published in the Journal of Human Rights Practice (Oxford Academic) documented, through interviews with 44 participants in Uganda and Zimbabwe, how the fear of surveillance undermines trust and interpersonal relationships, creating spirals of paranoia and mistrust that directly affect the right to freedom of assembly.

These findings extend well beyond authoritarian contexts. In the United States, the Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration found in a survey of 41,000 households that one in five Americans avoided online activity because of concerns about government data collection. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has highlighted studies showing that government surveillance discourages both speech and access to information on the internet. When people know they are being watched, they change what they say, where they go, and whom they associate with. The extension of these chilling effects from the digital to the physical realm, through gait recognition cameras, voice identification microphones, and Wi-Fi sensing systems, represents a qualitative escalation.

Amnesty International's Ban the Scan campaign, launched in 2021, has mapped the surveillance landscape of New York City, documenting more than 25,500 CCTV cameras across the city and revealing that the NYPD used facial recognition technology in 22,000 cases since 2017. The campaign found that the most surveilled neighbourhood across three boroughs was an area in Brooklyn with a population comprising 54.4 per cent Black residents, underscoring the racialised geography of surveillance infrastructure. Amnesty further documented how facial recognition was used at Black Lives Matter protest sites in 2020 to identify, track, and harass people exercising their rights to peaceful assembly.

The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is preparing a thematic report, expected at the 62nd session of the Human Rights Council, analysing the impact of digital and AI-assisted surveillance on assembly and association rights, including chilling effects. A 2025 study in Big Data and Society, examining Extinction Rebellion protests in The Hague, revealed that surveillance technology produces effects beyond traditional chilling, including what researchers termed “hyper-transparency” and “hyper-alertness” among both protesters and police.

The Rise of Anti-Surveillance Fashion

The proliferation of behavioural identification systems has given rise to a counter-movement that sounds like it belongs in a cyberpunk novel but is entirely real: adversarial fashion. These are garments, accessories, and cosmetic techniques designed to confuse, disrupt, or defeat AI surveillance systems.

Artist and researcher Adam Harvey pioneered this field with his CV Dazzle project in 2010, which used cubist-inspired makeup patterns to defeat facial detection algorithms. The technique, named after the dazzle camouflage developed by British painter Norman Wilkinson for Allied ships during the First World War, works by obscuring key facial features until recognition systems can no longer detect a human face. Harvey followed this with HyperFace in 2016, which takes the opposite approach: rather than hiding faces, it floods the environment with false face-like patterns printed on fabric, exploiting algorithms' preference for the highest-confidence facial region.

More recently, the Italian company Cap_able has developed a patented process that algorithmically generates adversarial patterns, translating them into knitted garments that retail between USD 300 and USD 600. These garments combine visual adversarial patterns with infrared protection, aiming to disrupt both optical and thermal surveillance. Researchers have also published work on thermally activated dual-modal adversarial clothing that can defeat both visible-light cameras and infrared sensors simultaneously.

However, as technologist Adam Harvey himself has cautioned, “Camouflage, in general, should be considered temporary, but especially technical camouflage that targets quickly evolving algorithms.” The arms race between surveillance systems and countermeasures is inherently asymmetric: updating a neural network is cheaper and faster than redesigning a wardrobe. Moreover, the very act of wearing obviously adversarial clothing in a public space draws human attention, potentially marking the wearer as suspicious even as it confuses the machines.

The video surveillance industry, enhanced by AI, is projected to grow from USD 3.90 billion in 2024 to USD 12.46 billion by 2030, according to market research. Against this scale of investment, adversarial fashion remains a niche countermeasure, meaningful as a statement of resistance but limited as a practical solution to the erosion of anonymity.

Europe's Border Experiment in Behavioural Biometrics

While much of the debate about behavioural biometrics focuses on domestic surveillance, the technology is also reshaping the boundaries of national security and border control. The European Union's PopEye project, funded through a Horizon Europe grant of 3.2 million euros, represents a significant step towards integrating gait recognition into border security infrastructure.

PopEye, an acronym for “robust Privacy-preserving biOmetric technologies for Passengers' identification and verification at EU external borders maximising the accuracY, reliability and throughput of the rEcognition,” aims to identify individuals on the move, at distances of up to 200 metres, without requiring them to stop. The project combines gait recognition with 3D facial recognition, addressing the limitations of each technology when used in isolation.

The project follows a 2021 Frontex study that examined gait recognition in depth, suggesting that video, radar, and floor sensors could be used to identify people by how they walk. Led by the European Association for Biometrics, PopEye involves partners including the AIT Austrian Institute of Technology, Idiap Research Institute, KU Leuven, and Vrije Universiteit Brussel, among others. Pilot programmes are being conducted at the external borders of Romania and Finland, with the Finnish Ministry of Interior and Romanian Border Authorities serving as key participants.

The project's emphasis on privacy preservation and compliance with the EU's AI Act and GDPR reflects an awareness that the technology it develops operates in a sensitive legal and ethical space. Researchers from VUB and KU Leuven are leading efforts on integrated impact assessments to safeguard human rights and data protection. Yet the fundamental tension remains: a system designed to identify people at a distance, without their cooperation, is inherently a surveillance technology, regardless of the procedural safeguards that surround it.

The Economics of Knowing Who You Are

The security technologist Bruce Schneier, a fellow and lecturer at Harvard's Kennedy School and board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, has written extensively about the economics of surveillance and the asymmetries of power it creates. “It is poor civic hygiene to install technologies that could someday facilitate a police state,” Schneier has warned. He has illustrated the collapsing cost of surveillance with a telling comparison: covert human surveillance of an individual costs approximately USD 175,000 per month, while obtaining location information from a mobile provider costs as little as USD 30 per month.

Behavioural biometrics push this economic logic further still. Gait recognition can operate using existing CCTV infrastructure. Keystroke dynamics require only software. Wi-Fi sensing leverages networks that are already installed in virtually every commercial and institutional building. The marginal cost of identifying one additional person approaches zero, which means the economic incentive to deploy these systems is enormous and the barriers to mass deployment are vanishingly small.

This economic reality creates what Schneier has called an alliance of interests between corporate and government surveillance. Corporations collect behavioural data for authentication, fraud prevention, and customer profiling. Governments seek the same data for security, immigration enforcement, and law enforcement. The data collected for one purpose inevitably becomes available for others, a phenomenon that privacy advocates call “function creep.” The US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has already issued guidance stating that biometric information, including keystroke frequency and behavioural monitoring, used in employment decisions must comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Zuboff's analysis cuts deeper. She argues that “the power to predict human behaviour is the power to modify human behaviour, and this is what surveillance capitalism is all about.” When every public interaction can be linked to a known identity through behavioural patterns, the entire notion of a public sphere where individuals can move, speak, and associate without being tracked becomes an anachronism. The right to privacy, she insists, is not merely about data protection; it is about the conditions necessary for human autonomy: “what should become data in the first place, that is where the line has to be drawn.”

What Remains of Anonymity

The question this article set out to address, what does the rise of AI behavioural recognition mean for anonymity in public spaces, has a disquieting answer. The technological trajectory is clear: identification systems are becoming cheaper, more accurate, more pervasive, and harder to evade. They are moving beyond the face into the body's every motion and utterance. They work through walls, in darkness, and across distances that make consent meaningless.

The regulatory response, while significant in certain jurisdictions, remains fragmented and reactive. The EU's AI Act represents the most comprehensive attempt at governance, but its exceptions for law enforcement create significant loopholes. BIPA has produced substantial financial penalties in the United States, but it is a single state's law, and its recent amendments have blunted its deterrent effect. The UK's ICO strategy is still in its early stages. Globally, there is no coherent framework for governing technologies that can identify people from their walk, their voice, or the way they type.

What is at stake is not merely a technical question about privacy settings or data policies. It is a question about the kind of society that emerges when public spaces become zones of continuous, ambient identification. Research on the chilling effects of surveillance demonstrates that when people believe they are being watched, they modify their behaviour, self-censor their speech, and withdraw from political participation. The extension of surveillance from visible cameras to invisible behavioural identification systems does not reduce this effect; it amplifies it, because there is no way to know when you are and are not being observed.

Truly private human interaction in public spaces, a conversation with a stranger that no system records, a protest march where participants cannot be individually identified, a walk through a city where your movements are not logged and matched against a database, is becoming technologically impossible. This does not mean it will vanish entirely; enforcement gaps, technical limitations, and deliberate resistance will preserve pockets of anonymity. But the default condition of public life is shifting, from one where anonymity was assumed to one where identification is the norm.

The technologies being installed today will outlast the political conditions under which they were deployed. Gait recognition cameras placed for counter-terrorism will not be removed when the threat recedes. Voice identification systems built for banking will not be dismantled when fraud declines. Wi-Fi sensing capabilities embedded in building infrastructure will persist indefinitely. The question is not whether these technologies will be misused, but when, by whom, and with what consequences for the freedoms that depend on the ability to move through the world unrecognised.

Bruce Schneier put it plainly: “Privacy protects us from abuses by those in power, even if we're doing nothing wrong at the time of surveillance.” In a world where your walk, your voice, and your keystrokes are all that stand between you and identification, that protection is being quietly, systematically, irreversibly eroded.

---

References and Sources

1. Joy Buolamwini and Timnit Gebru. “Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in Commercial Gender Classification.” Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 81, 2018. http://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/buolamwini18a/buolamwini18a.pdf

2. South China Morning Post. “Chinese police test gait-recognition technology from AI start-up Watrix that identifies people based on how they walk.” November 2018. https://www.scmp.com/tech/start-ups/article/2187600/chinese-police-surveillance-gets-boost-ai-start-watrix-technology-can

3. NEC Corporation. “NEC Launches new system using Biometric Authentication Technology.” Press Release, 3 September 2024. https://www.nec.com/en/press/202409/global2024090301.html

4. GlobeNewsWire/SNS Insider. “Gait Biometrics Market Size to Hit USD 3.41 Billion by 2032.” 21 July 2025. https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2025/07/21/3118758/0/en/Gait-Biometrics-Market-Size-to-Hit-USD-3-41-Billion-by-2032-at-13-38-CAGR-Research-by-SNS-Insider.html

5. European Parliament. “EU AI Act: first regulation on artificial intelligence.” https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence

6. Stanford Law School. “No. 91: EU Artificial Intelligence Act: Regulating the Use of Facial Recognition Technologies in Publicly Accessible Spaces.” https://law.stanford.edu/publications/no-91-eu-artificial-intelligence-act-regulating-the-use-of-facial-recognition-technologies-in-publicly-accessible-spaces/

7. WilmerHale. “Year in Review: 2024 BIPA Litigation Takeaways.” 19 February 2025. https://www.wilmerhale.com/en/insights/blogs/wilmerhale-privacy-and-cybersecurity-law/20250219-year-in-review-2024-bipa-litigation-takeaways

8. Bloomberg Law. “Clearview AI Gets Settlement Approved in Face-Scan Privacy Case.” 2025. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/clearview-ai-gets-settlement-approved-in-face-scan-privacy-case

9. CNN. “San Francisco just banned facial-recognition technology.” 14 May 2019. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/14/tech/san-francisco-facial-recognition-ban

10. SF Standard. “SFPD skirted facial-recognition ban, lawsuit says.” 18 July 2024. https://sfstandard.com/2024/07/18/san-francisco-police-facial-recognition-violations/

11. ACLU. “Williams v. City of Detroit.” https://www.aclu.org/cases/williams-v-city-of-detroit-face-recognition-false-arrest

12. Shoshana Zuboff. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs, 2019.

13. Oxford Academic. “Chilling Effects of Surveillance and Human Rights: Insights from Qualitative Research in Uganda and Zimbabwe.” Journal of Human Rights Practice, Vol. 16, Issue 1, 2024. https://academic.oup.com/jhrp/article/16/1/397/7234270

14. Amnesty International. “Ban The Scan New York City.” https://banthescan.amnesty.org/nyc/index.html

15. Storbeck, M. et al. “Surveillance experiences of extinction rebellion activists and police: Unpacking the technologization of Dutch protest policing.” Big Data & Society, 2025. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20539517241307892

16. ICO. “Preventing harm, promoting trust: our AI and biometrics strategy.” June 2025. https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/our-information/our-strategies-and-plans/artificial-intelligence-and-biometrics-strategy/

17. ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks. “A Survey on WiFi-based Human Identification: Scenarios, Challenges, and Current Solutions.” 2024. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3708323

18. ScienceDirect. “WiFi-based human activity recognition through wall using deep learning.” Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2024. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0952197623013556

19. Springer Nature. “Keystroke dynamics for intelligent biometric authentication with machine learning.” Discover Applied Sciences, 2025. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42452-025-07449-5

20. MDPI/Applied Sciences. “Authentication by Keystroke Dynamics: The Influence of Typing Language.” 2023. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/13/20/11478

21. Bruce Schneier. “The Eternal Value of Privacy.” Schneier on Security, May 2006. https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2006/05/theeternalvalue_of.html

22. Biometric Update. “PopEye to strengthen EU border biometrics with gait recognition integration.” October 2024. https://www.biometricupdate.com/202410/popeye-to-strengthen-eu-border-biometrics-with-gait-recognition-integration

23. Mozilla Foundation. “How to Disappear: The Rise of Anti-Surveillance Fashion.” https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/nothing-personal/anti-surveillance-fashion-privacy-ai/

24. GOV.UK. “Briefing note on the ethical issues arising from the public sector use of biometric voice recognition technology.” https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/public-sector-use-of-biometric-voice-recognition-technology-ethical-issues/

25. Pew Research Center. “Public views of police use of facial recognition technology.” 17 March 2022. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2022/03/17/public-more-likely-to-see-facial-recognition-use-by-police-as-good-rather-than-bad-for-society/

---

Tim Green UK-based Systems Theorist & Independent Technology Writer

Tim explores the intersections of artificial intelligence, decentralised cognition, and posthuman ethics. His work, published at smarterarticles.co.uk, challenges dominant narratives of technological progress while proposing interdisciplinary frameworks for collective intelligence and digital stewardship.

His writing has been featured on Ground News and shared by independent researchers across both academic and technological communities.

ORCID: 0009-0002-0156-9795 Email: tim@smarterarticles.co.uk

CeCe is Freaky Again

#nsfw #CeCe

CeCe still had impeccable fashion sense, piecing together outfits from thrift stores and online deals that made her look polished, professional. On workdays, she'd tuck away the naked freak entirely. She dressed presentably in blouses and slacks, arriving at the tech firm with calculated efficiency, her brilliant mind dissecting code and prototypes like it was child's play. Despite lacking a degree, her raw talent shone through; promotions came steadily, compensation rising with each one. It was all she had outside our bubble. This was her anchor to stability, so she fought for it tooth and nail. She masked her obsessions behind spreadsheets and meetings, never letting a hint of her porn-fueled world slip.

What no one knew. Her bosses praised her for her dedication to the company.

Her daily transformation to her true self started with her commute home. We were able to save our money and buy affordable cars. It was a fond memory because we picked them out for each other, not for ourselves.

As soon as she pulled out of the parking lot in her small Honda, merging into the city's evening traffic, she'd start undressing—blouse unbuttoned and tossed to the passenger seat, skirt hiked up and shimmied off, bra and panties following until she was completely bare, her curvy body reclining against the leather as she smiled to herself. The steering wheel cool against her bare breasts, the AC teasing her nipples, the thrill of potential accidents or glances from trucks beside her—it was her decompression, a private rebellion before she arrived home to me, naked and waiting.

And yes, she often got out her car wearing nothing but heels and smile carrying her clothes like it was just a normal day. I told her they will kick us out. She just responds with “We pay rent early and no one has complained.” There is no winning when CeCe wants to be naked.

CeCe had developed quite the reputation as “the naked chick,” at our apartment complex. No one ever said it to our faces. Neighbors witnessed some of her naked antics. They would see her strolling to the laundry room in the dead of night, thick thighs flexing as she carried baskets with nothing but flip-flops on, her full breasts swaying freely. Sometimes she would slip out for trash runs, her juicy ass on display under the dim hallway lights. She even took quick naked trips to the mailbox, where she'd stand exposed for a moment, sorting mail before retreating. But it was always calculated. She chose late hours, avoiding family hours when kids might be around. Folks would nod politely in the mornings, pretending they hadn't seen, but whispers floated.

Inside our apartment, our place was a shrine to her addictions: multiple screens flickering with porn tabs. Black women in exhibitionist bliss, gooning sessions that ran for hours. We had dildos and toys scattered on nightstands and shelves, lube bottles within arm's reach. I didn't mind one bit. I didn't want CeCe to feel limited, caged in by judgment. If it weren't for me and my family welcoming her into holidays and support, she'd be utterly alone, adrift in her fixations with porn her only companion.

Speaking of my family, CeCe took to them well. We started small. I took her on a Friday evening to meet my mom. At that time, we were just friends and I kept it that way. My mom is a special needs professional and was well versed in handling CeCe. My mom's name is Mimi. CeCe took to her quickly and I was glad to see that she found another safe person to add to her circle. Mom insisted that CeCe talk to her on a first name basis. That took some pressure off the formalities for her.

Over time my mom and I slowly acclimated her to the rest of the family in small doses. By the 3rd year of us living together, CeCe would breeze through family gatherings with ease. However this peace did not last long.

At gatherings, my aunt and uncle would corner me. My older cousins would watch us and judge. Some of my distant cousins were getting married and starting families.

My bold relatives would say things out of earshot from everyone. They would say things almost every time they saw me: “Tasha, why are you still living with CeCe? You're not getting any younger.” “Find a man, start a family.”

What they said stung, it wore me down but I hid it. Their assumptions about my life, about us. It was all wrong, but I didn't want to tell them. I didn't want to drag CeCe into another stressful family situation. I still have not come out to my mom yet. It was too much. So I just dealt with the comments shielding CeCe the best I could.

However, CeCe eventually overheard them during one fateful Thanksgiving dinner. They had gotten bolder over the past few gatherings and stopped being as discreet as before.

CeCe let it slide the first time, but the second time she heard it, she had enough. She came to my defense fiercely, her voice steady but edged with that calm directness that cut through bullshit. “Our life is more complicated than that,” she said openly, no shame in her tone. “If you have a problem with a lesbian couple, then maybe I don't have any family here either.”

The room went silent, tension crackling, but my mom shut it down quick—standing her ground, eyes flashing at the judging relatives. “Don't you start.” She stared daggers at the ring leaders with a paused silence. “Tasha's happy, and CeCe's family. If you can't accept that, you're the ones missing out.” It was a turning point; my mom had became our quiet advocate. She didn't even know our real status until that very moment, but she stood firm and supported us. I almost cried if it wasn't for how uneasy the moment was.

The ring leader that kept pushing me to settle down said meekly, “I didn't know.” Head down speaking softly. Her fork resting on her plate in shame.

Mom wasn't having it. She was done.

“This gathering is over. Make a plate and leave, this is not how we spend Thanksgiving together. Someone else can try again next year.” The room remained silent. She continued, her strong voice resonating off the walls. “My mother and father, the ones who bought this house would never want us fighting in our house. And if any of you have problems with Tasha and CeCe, now that you know the truth, do not come back here again. I will not stand for anyone judging my babies like this.”

With a knowing silence, my aunt and uncle quietly took their leave. My cousins took their prepared dishes home with them. If they wanted anything, mom just nodded silently. She didn't leave the dinner table. Watching everyone like a sentinel. A guardian.

CeCe just held my hand slowly rubbing my palm for comfort. I didn't make eye contact with anyone. I just looked away. I didn't want everyone to find out like this, but I guess they had to find out eventually. I wasn't embarrassed. I just didn't want CeCe to have another bad family moment. Once everyone left, I told my mom “I'm so sorry, I didn't mean for this to happen.” CeCe was the first one to respond and she gently slapped my hand.

“Shush, I'm the one that spoke up. None of this is your fault in the slightest. I just couldn't sit by and let them pick on you.”

My mom sat and observed. She looked at us differently now as if the nearly 4 years we had been living together finally started to click. “It all make sense now.” She said with a knowing fascination. There was no judgement. She was letting reality settle in.

My mom is amazing.

After that day, my mom stepped up in ways I never expected. She decided to keep family gatherings between just us from that day forward. She didn't mind. It was less work. If her siblings wanted big gatherings, they would have to step it up from now on. Just like me, she devoted her free time to nurture CeCe. She knew the events that lead us to dropping out of college and her breakdown being exposed to everyone in her dorm.

From then on, my mom poured into CeCe like she was her own daughter, inviting us over more often for quiet dinners or longer visits to her house to spend the weekends together. I was really impressed and surprised by how readily she accepted our lesbian relationship. She didn't judge, no prying questions.

She even casually suggested marriage one day, not for romance, but for the legal benefits: She spoke to me quietly, “When CeCe's ready, think about it—health insurance, taxes, all that practical stuff. Love like yours deserves protection.” I was stunned my mom was ok with that. She understood my love for CeCe stemmed from her brightness, her raw talent, her directness, and that unapologetic spirit—you couldn't help but want to support her, to shield her from a world that often misunderstood her fixations.

CeCe felt safe and comfortable around my mom in a way she never had with her own family, opening up bit by bit during those visits. Mom was the curious sort, always observant, and it didn't take long for her to notice how CeCe fidgeted in her clothes—tugging at collars, shifting uncomfortably in seats, like the fabric was an itch she couldn't scratch. One Sunday afternoon, as we sat in her living room sipping tea, Mimi leaned forward with that gentle, knowing smile. “CeCe, honey, why do you always look so uncomfortable in your clothes? Like you'd rather not be wearing them at all,” she said with a playful smirk.

CeCe froze, her eyes darting to me, but I decided to be candid. CeCe would never have broached it on her own. “Well, Mom, CeCe is basically Eve's half-sister. You can't keep clothes on the girl.”

Mimi's eyes widened in great surprise, her teacup pausing mid-sip. She set it down, a flicker of upset crossing her face. She was not angry, but looked hurt hurt. “Tasha, why on earth did it take so long for you to tell me this? I'm your mother. We both could've been supporting her all this time! It's just us ladies here after all.” She turned to CeCe, her voice softening. “If that's how you are, then be naked anytime you want in my house. I mean it. But let's talk about it, okay? I want to understand your true nature and I need to make sure I'm ready for what I'm giving permission to.”

We had a long talk that afternoon, the three of us on the couch, sunlight streaming through the windows as CeCe slowly peeled off her layers—first her sweater, then her jeans, until she sat there naked, her caramel curves relaxed for the first time that day. I made sure mom was truly prepared, probing gently: “Mom, this isn't just casual—it's extreme more than I can say right now. Are you sure you want the full story? It might change how you see things.” Mom nodded firmly, her professional instructor's empathy shining through, ready to listen without flinching.

CeCe, hesitant at first, told her most everything, her voice steady but vulnerable as she opened up. She explained why her mom got arrested—that frantic night fueled by CeCe's phone confession about loving porn and masturbation, rejecting marriage and traditional life, which sent her mom into a tailspin of control and denial. “Porn... it's everything to me now,” Her voice wavered, quivered, trembling. I held her hand and looked at her willing support telepathically. The woman was brave. She was naked in my moms house confessing her deepest secret to someone else for the first time.

“It started in college when Tasha showed me porn to help after a bad date. I was so sheltered, so shy, but it fixated me—especially videos of black women owning their bodies, exposing themselves. It's my coping mechanism, my high. I have to watch it to cum, to feel regulated.” She slowly gestured to her bare body with a tentative smile.

“I do everything like this—all the time. Laundry, cooking, even working from home. It's very extreme....” She hesitated with a sigh, letting the full gravity of her depraved mind walk into the light.

“I masturbate in public spots. I sent Tasha nudes from the college library all the time. I have done this in parks too. I know its risky, I know its very wrong, I know you are probably shocked too, but it makes me feel alive. It's who I am now.... and I understand if you want nothing to do with me anymore. I know I'm a degenerate freak that will never get therapy to fix this...I don't want to fix this.”

She sighed.. CeCe braced herself, eyes downcast, scared she'd be outcast again, unwanted like with her own family. “I think you will hate me for it,” she whispered, trembling. “That I'd be too much. So I hid the truth. I thought I could stay dressed and pretend while I'm here. You do so much for both of us. I respected your home too much to do such things like this or even talk about this without permission.”

Mom was totally unfazed. She reached out and took CeCe's hand, her expression warm and steady. She turned to me then, eyes misty but resolute. “She's precious, Tasha. Do everything you can to protect her. I see now why you bonded with her—you're her protector and her anchor. Yes, I was hoping my baby would settle down with a man, but I see why CeCe was a necessary detour and truly your calling. You are her rock. You didn't want to take that away from her. I welcome her too, because you showed her you were safe. CeCe is a brilliant and talented woman. In my profession I have talked and dealt with all kinds of unusual situations. To me, this is no different. CeCe is not harming herself. She is thriving with you. Just like you Tasha, I can overlook her 'unique' traits. She's a woman living her life without any shame or apology. I can't help but applaud that. Your secrets are safe with me. I love you both. What you just told me changes nothing.”

My mom got up and hugged the naked woman. CeCe was trembling. She was ready for the worst and instead she was shown love and understanding. CeCe broke down into hysterical crying right there, collapsing into my mom's arms, her naked body shaking with sobs that seemed to release a lifetime of pain. Tears soaking my mom's blouse.

She was so ready for things to go the other way—rejection, judgment—but instead, she found the mom she never had, accepting her fully, flaws and all. The rest of the day was spent comforting her: My mom holding her like a child, rocking gently and whispering affirmations; me stroking her back, wiping her tears, the three of us tangled in a heap on the couch. It was years of hurt, abandonment, judgment, and trauma pouring out, finally letting go because, at last, she was accepted—naked, obsessed, and unapologetically herself.

In Summary: * Listening now to women's basketball with the North Carolina Tar Heels leading the SMU Mustangs 20 to 7 in the first quarter. I plan to stay with this game until it ends, then take care of my night prayers before putting my old self to bed.

Prayers, etc.: * I have a daily prayer regimen I try to follow throughout the day from early morning, as soon as I roll out of bed, until head hits pillow at night. Details of that regimen are linked to my link tree, which is linked to my profile page here.

Health Metrics: * bw= 225.53 lbs. * bp= 145/86 (65)

Exercise: * morning stretches, balance exercises, kegel pelvic floor exercises, half squats, calf raises, wall push-ups

Diet: * 05:30 – 1 peanut butter sandwich * 06:30 – 1 Sonic cheeseburger * 08:15 – 2 crispy oatmeal cookies * 09:20 – beef chop suey * 09:50 – enchiladas * 10:30 – breaded pork chops * 18:00 – cheese and crackers

Activities, Chores, etc.: * 04:30 – listen to local news talk radio * 06:00 – bank accounts activity monitored * 06:30 – read, pray, follow news reports from various sources, surf the socials * 13:30 – listen to The Dan Bongino Show Podcast * 15:00 – listen to The Jack Ricardi Show * 16:59 – listening now to the pregame finishing for tonight's NCAA women's basketball game between the SMU Mustangs and the North Carolina Tar Heels. Call of the game will be provided by the SMU Mustangs Sports Network.

Chess: * 12:30 – moved in all pending CC games