Zinspecteur Click Klak en de zaak met de Levensgevaarlijke Explosieve Materialen

In verhoorkamer 200.1 van de Smægmåånse Veiligheidservice zat Zinspecteur Click Klak tegenover de gisternacht opgepakte wereldberuchte terrorist Ali Neeja.

Na een tip afkomstig van notabene zijn echtgenote tevens partner in de terroristische huishouding W. Itlijn. werd het gezin metname Ali jarenlang op de voet gevolgd door de vaderlandse diensten verlenende kantoor opgericht voor alles wat veilig is en of daar voor door gaat. Gisternacht besloot de dienst tot actie over te gaan na een allesbehalve geheime bezorging van alweer een pakket vol explosief materiaal.

Met veel bombarie, lawaai, glanzend en flitsend materiaal, reden zinspecteurs Click Klak en zijn manschapen naar de Laan van de vrijheid nummer 666, gebouwd in een luxe wijk waar de rijksten der rijken woonden, dat wil zeggen een plek met enorm veel groen, leef optrekken met een grote leegte tussen muren, wijds uiteen staande en vaak verdomd weinig mensen bewegend tussen die muren, stevige wanden gemaakt van duizenden opgestapelde met mortel aan elkaar gelijmde gebakken stenen afgewisseld met hier en daar een kijk naar buiten gat. Al die huizen zijn altijd voorzien van de best betaalbare en meest eenvoudig instelbare bewakingsystemen om al het aangeschafte, binnen gegraaide spul daar binnen binnen voor eigen pupillen te houden, de huidige waard opgesloten in die huis zone verhoudt zich tot de soortgelijken buiten de eigen wanden wereld zoals hij is.

Dit systeem begon meteen nadat de dienstverleners de voordeur tot ontploffing hadden gebracht onderdeel te worden van Zinspecteurs Click Klaks 666e kakofonie, tussen de sirenes door klonk Da da da du liebst mich nicht, het lied van Trio maar dan in een illegaal verkregen acid house versie, Click Klaks mannen wisten dat dit zou gebeuren. Ze hadden deze inval van verre zien aankomen allemaal dankzij de online werk agenda en daarom ook tot die tijd in details kunnen voorbereiden zodat ze alweer niet voor verassingen kwamen te staan.

Het moment van de inval was weliswaar omstreden, de inval was net tijdens de school voorjaarsvakantie en velen wouden liever met hun gezin naar een huisje te Elders op aard dan hier een inval doen op onbehaaglijke naarlingen zoals Ali Neeja en W.

Itlijn. Echter ze kregen loon naar werken en op vakantie gaan naar Elders of Ergens anders hoort daar niet bij dat is slechts het resultaat van dit hele gebeuren, vakantie werk daar dankzij werk voor veilig voor zichzelf en anderen hier, al is het tijdens het beste moment voor zo'n vakantie.

De vele geluiden stapelden zich op, de commando voerder schreeuwde zijn commando re mi fa so ti do's zo hard dat zelfs de buren 110 meter verderop het zouden kunnen horen, de optocht ervoor hadden ze zeker niet gemist. De vijf kleurrijk uitgedoste wagens, de valse noten blazende speakers altijd gepaard met neon knipper lichten, het noodzakelijke lawaai opdat de vele onschuldigen levend hier in Smægmå zich ondanks alle slechtheid op de wereld zich een beetje veiliger voelen. Dat en cultuurlijk om die in en in slechten de stuipen op het anders zo rustige maar boze lijf te jagen.

De tot in de puntjes voorbereide inval verliep vanzelfsprekend vrij vlot, binnen luttele seconden na het inbeuken van de slaapkamerdeur werd Ali Neeja door de speciaal daarvoor ingehuurde expert Klaas Vaker wakker geschudt uit zijn immens diepe slaap, W. Itlijn was afwezig, op vakantie naar Benjemaleisië met de kinderen Fantasia en Fata Morgana en haar publieks geheim, minnaar “”! Op en naast het bed van de terrorist lagen vele explosieven, ook op vele andere plekken in de villa vonden de veiligheidsdiensten verlenende ambtenaren heel veel explosief materiaal. Deze net ontwaakte man was inderdaad een gevaar voor de staat.

Nu zat Ali Neeja klaarwakker tegenover Click Klak, de zinspecteur maakte tss, tsss, geluiden terwijl hij overbelichte foto's liet zien van bijna al het explosieve materiaal gevonden in zijn huis en in containers rondom naamloze villa 666 op De Laan der Vrijheid. Hij sprak “Terrorist Ali u was tot op heden een gerespecteerd lid van de vaderlandse elite met een peperduur contract, had alles wat u hartje kon begeren en aardig wat spul dat u hoofdje dacht te moeten willen, waarom bent u dan zo boos!” Het is zo dat Ali Neeja had van voor dit verhoor had gevraagd of hij zich alsjeblieft mocht beroepen op zwijgrecht, gebruik mocht maken van ijzige stilte in ieder geval tijdens dit verhoor, dit mocht, en daarom zei Neeja deze keer en alle komende keren waarop hij iets kon zeggen, niks, hij slaakte enkel zuchten op gepaste tijden.

Het veilige woord zou dus dit gehele stuk aan Click Klak toebehoren “U heeft uwer gezin, W. Itlijn, Fantasia, Fata Morgana en de Schildpad Stoffel meegesleept in deze blinde haat jegens ons, u denkbeeldige vijand. Stel dat u kind dit materiaal in de vingers had gekregen, wat dan! Het had massaal kunnen exploderen, enorme schade aanrichten, u opgezadeld met levenslange spijt” geslaakte zucht 2 De zinspecteur fluisterde iets in zijn mini microfoontje, het verhoor werd elders in Kantoor twee te Zęįst door een tweede virtueel aanwezige zinspecteur live gevolgd zodat Click Klak mogelijke verhoor fouten meteen kon herstellen en daarnaast stond hij in direct contact met zijn vijftien assistenten en hun secondanten aan de andere kant van de verhoor, bestudeer en doorvraag kamer deur, In dit specifieke geval schakelde hij de hulp in van de tweederangs secondanten. Even later bracht een gepantserde persoon een gepantserd koffertje in de praatruimte, opende deze metalen koffer en vertrok daarna schielijks met samengeknepen billen. geslaakte zucht 3.

In de koffer lag een klein deel van het gevonden explosief materiaal. Click Klak nam daarvan een nog kleiner deeltje in handen, keek even naar camera drie achter spiegel twee, zijn spontaan ingestudeerde actie werd na enig gekrakeel in de studio goedgekeurd door de VAZ. Het verhoor kon op deze wijze uren voortgaan. “Dit materiaal lag in de keuken meneer Neeja, op maar 15 meter afstand van Stoffel, 25 van Fantasia en 31 meter van Fata, dit ene stukje plastic had kunnen zorgen voor ernstige gevolgen, als je op zo'n gevuld extreem druk gevoelig bultje drukt is de ellende niet te overzien en op een zo'n stukje zitten honderden van die nopjes. Als u en u mogelijke handlangers dit spul samen tot ontploffing zouden brengen vrees ik dat de wereld in geen tijd ten onder gaat, in ieder induvidueel nopje zit valse lucht met opzet daarin geplaatst opdat het echt niet mag ontsnappen, nooit. Allemaal in het kader van onze veiligheid, stootvastheid, voorkomen van ellende oftewel waarborgen van de kwaliteit des levens. Zoiets laat je niet moedwillig ontsnappen. Geslaakte zucht 4

Zinspecteur Click Klak was wederom opgestaan uit zijn pluche zetel om te lopen ijsberen rondom de op een houten klapstoel gezetelde terrorist, zogenaamd diep in gedachten, turend naar de betonnen vloer, loenzend naar Ali, wachtend op een geweldige ingeving waarmee hij deze baksteenrijke misdadiger voor altijd op het goede pad zou brengen ver weg van deze levensbedreigende plastic lakens vol kwalijke staatsgevaarlijke lucht stukje voor stukje vastgeklonken in makkelijk te detoneren bubbels. Na vijf minuten rondjes rennen in de kleine ruimte gaf hij het op Dit keer werd geen zingeving door het dribbel ritueel opgeroepen. De volgende slaak zucht kwam op naam van Click Klak Geslaakte zucht 1 meteen gevolgd door Geslaakte zucht 5 opdoemend uit het keelgat van de terrorist.

In ongemakkelijke stilte werd het verhoor voortgezet tot aan de rust. Tijdens de rust bleef Ali Neeja in de grauwe grijze half duistere spiegelkamer. Click Klak vertrok naar de kantine vergader kamer voor nodig overleg met zijn inmiddels 50 assistenten en 50 secondanten. Een brainstorm rondom de grote hete koffie bron komt de staatsveiligheid altijd ten goede. De vergader eettafel was ruim voorzien van alle brandstoffen om iedereen actief en allert te houden tijdens de dagelijkse crisis situaties, slagroomgebak, borrelnoten, een plank met vele kazen, wijn, water erbij, hartige taarten, pasta schotel, rijpe vruchten, alcohol vrije frisdrank en een sorbet na, het land was bij de service altijd in goede handen. Dit soort bijeenkomsten waren altijd goed voor een doorbraak, hier kwam ieder overleg een persoon aankakken met de werkzame oplossing voor alle onze persoonlijke veiligheid bedreigende aardse problemen en bijpassende personen. Het is dan ook in het belang van ons allen, onze vrijheid, handelingsbekwaamheden, efficiëntie, koopkrachten oftewel het veilig heden dat ik hier verder geen woorden meer aan smerig maak. Het land zou anders teveel over zijn echte leiders komen te weten.

Terug in de benauwende ruimte was de zinspecteur voorzien van goede enerverende brandstof en hij zat redelijk vol goede bruikbare gedachten, zoveel als een net tot de nok gevulde maag mogelijk maakt dan. Hij moest en zou Ali Neeja breken, op de best mogelijke manier toespreken, zodat deze tot inkeer kwam, daarna als herboren met veel plezier zijn twintig jaar extra straf ging uitzitten, zichzelf zinvol ging maken in dat voor alle anderen, de onschuldigen in dit verhaal, afgesloten hol, samen werken met alle andere tot inkeer gekomen of komende terroristen aan de oplossing voor puzzels en of voorlezen van gedrukte bladzijden. Click Klak had dankzij jaren speurwerk hier aan vooraf al een helder beeld van het hele netwerk van deze eenkennige leider, vooralsnog leek het een lone wolf die zijn geliefde staat, land vol liefhebbend en goed volk, met deze valse lucht wou ondermijnen. Hij moest echter een volledige bekentenis aan Ali Neeja ontfutselen zodat hij ook echt kon worden gestraft voor de aangeschafte en uitgevoerde misdaden.

Tijdens het overleg was in alle haast Ali Neeja's bekentenis geschreven, Click Klak had dus alleen nog maar handtekeningen nodig onder dat document. “Dus” zei Click Klak. *Geslaakte zucht 6” “daar zit ik weer in mijn heerlijke relax stoel en jij nog altijd op je klap stoeltje, heb je al inkeer? Voel je de schuld opkomen, besef je wat je hebt gedaan Ali Neeja?!”

Zucht zeven ontsnapte uit het lippen paar van de terrorist lippen, meer niet. Er ontstond even een spannend moment toen de tl buis boven spiegel drie begon te knipperen, Beide heren werden nerveus door het probleem met wisselspanning in de lichtbuis. De zinspecteur meldde het probleem en een kreeg advies van een secondant. Click Klak liep naar het flikkerende licht en drukte op het aan en uit knopje, het licht ging weg en hield op met knipperen, De zinspecteur drukte nogmaals op het knopje en het probleem begon opnieuw. Het probleem was door deze interventie niet opgelost. Dit irriteerde Klak mateloos, de secondant van de secondant kwam na de reprimande de kamer binnen verwijderde de tl buis. Daarmee was dit tot overspanning leidende probleem in elk geval tijdelijk opgelost. Beide heren waren iets minder zichtbaar opgelucht.

“Wij, ik en mijn team van veilig deskundigen hebben tijdens het overleg aan je bekentenis gewerkt, ik zal hem voordragen dan is daarna het naamwoord aan jou, woorden, drievoudig, daar exact op die vooraf gefabriceerde locatie, onderaan de A4 om te erkennen dat je een misdadiger bent die ondanks al het goede dat dit land je gaf, dit volgeplempte begrensde levensgebied toch willens en wetens in gevaar hebt gebracht, oke?” sprak Click Clak die daarna een stap opzij moest zetten zodat camera vier Ali Neeja's knikje nogmaals, nadat de zinspecteur de verdachte wees op zijn onduidelijk toegeven, deze fysieke jawel kon registreren, tussen zucht 8 en negen kon iedereen die dat moest zien Ali nu wel duidelijk in beeld zien knikken. De voordracht van de bekentenis kon beginnen.

Ik Ali Neeja gehuwd burger van Smægmå met het burger dienstverlenings nummer 1234454345 wonend op De Laan der Vrijheid 666 geboren op een dag in een land ver ver van hier verklaar dat ik de thuisstaat, het pappieland Smægmå met opzet zin in gevaar bracht doormiddel van het kopen van onschuldig ogende producten waarom heen zat gewikkeld het eigenlijke gewilde explosieve materiaal, het object vol valse lucht onveilig opgesloten in grote en of kleine makkelijk tot ontploffing te brengen bubbels een welke u met geweld heeft laten, zie bewijzen 1 tot en met 123324, of nog wou laten ontsnappen en dus loslaten op ons, gedienstige, goed willende en gelovige inwoners plus bezoekers van dit geweldig gezellige en o zo vruchtbare belasting paradijs. U heeft aldoende gebruik gemaakt van en daardoor mede ontwikkeld een imposant netwerk waarin die zeer explosieve materialen, dit vreselijk gevaarlijke goed snel en efficiënt bij u thuis kon worden afgeleverd. Deze contacten staan bij deze bekentenis alfabetisch gerangschikt op bijlage 15 tot en met 83. U heeft weet van de gevolgen van het laten ontsnappen van deze valse lucht op u zelve als ook alle anderen, iedereen hier en daar, u beseft ten volste dat door u handelen iedereen vandaag de dag en alle op deze volgende in levensgevaar verkeerd.

Met vriendelijke groet ... (uw naam 3x)

geslaakte zucht 10 Een lange stilte volgde, Ali Neeja las de hele bekentenis ook de verzwegen stukken inclusief de duizenden bijlagen twee keer maar tekende het papier niet. De zinspecteur wees de terrorist op het vele werk door hem en zijn team verricht, de uren, het overleg, het plaatsen van apparatuur in zijn huis, de gevaren waaraan ze toen werden blootgesteld, het vele eten nodig om zoveel mensen dat werk te laten doen, de kosten voor de bouw van het veilig kantoor, de problemen daarbij, steeds meer geld was er nodig, de inkomens van iedereen noodzakelijk voor deze bekentenis kon worden voorgedragen en dat het niet meer dan normaal zou zijn dat Ali Neeja dus dat document de moeite waard zou maken alleen maar door 3 keer zijn naam te zetten onder dat witte A4 papier op exact de juiste plek. Op dat moment net na die lange speech begon tl buis twee boven gebroken spiegel één te knipperen, de spanning bij Ali Neeja was inmiddels door de druk om de waarheid te verhullen te hoog opgelopen om dit euvel nog te kunnen verdragen en zodoende zette hij hevig ademend reeks moeizame zuchten zo goed als vrijwillig met misschien een beetje hulp van de hand van Click Klak, we denken van niet, maar ja, door de spanningsproblemen in de lichtbuis was de beeld registratie apparatuur ook even uitgevallen, gelukkig meteen na bekentenis ondertekening hersteld zodat iedereen aan de andere kant van de spiegels en op het scherm Zinspecteur Click Klak triomfantelijk zag staan met de drievoudig ondertekende bekentenis.

Ali Neeja werd versuft, geblindoekt en lusteloos afgevoerd, vervolgens getransporteerd naar het zwaar beveiligde “Zijspoor” Bajes, Theater en Horeca complex. Click Klak werd op schouders genomen, een groot feest kwam op gang, hij en zijn team gingen met de bekentenis in handen op een boot door de grachten van Smægmå waar langs de kanten achter de omheining de wild enthousiaste veilige bevolking Hoezee, Hoezee roepende het leven voluit vierde.

Eind Veilig, dus Goed.

Nous adorons tous la magie de la technologie, surtout lorsqu'elle simplifie nos interactions quotidiennes. Prenez Google Fast Pair, par exemple. Ce protocole a été conçu avec une idée noble, permettre aux utilisateurs d'Android et de ChromeOS de connecter leurs gadgets Bluetooth en une fraction de seconde, d'une simple tape. Fini les menus de configuration interminables. Pourtant, cette quête de l'ultra-commodité vient de se heurter à un mur de sécurité inquiétant.

Des chercheurs en sécurité de l'université KU Leuven, en Belgique, ont révélé une réalité glaçante. Le protocole même qui rend vos connexions si fluides peut être retourné contre vous. Baptisée WhisperPair, cette collection de vulnérabilités permet à des pirates de prendre le contrôle de centaines de millions d'écouteurs, de casques et d'enceintes, transformant vos accessoires audio en outils d'espionnage redoutables.

L'équipe de recherche a identifié des failles critiques dans 17 accessoires audio utilisant le protocole Fast Pair, vendus par des géants de l'industrie comme Sony, JBL, Xiaomi, Nothing, OnePlus et même Google. Le scénario d'attaque est d'une simplicité effrayante. Un pirate équipé d'un équipement peu coûteux (comme un Raspberry Pi) et se trouvant à portée Bluetooth (environ 15 mètres) peut détecter votre appareil et s'y connecter silencieusement. Selon Sayon Duttagupta, l'un des chercheurs, l'attaque est fulgurante:

« Vous marchez dans la rue, écouteurs sur les oreilles. En moins de 15 secondes, nous pouvons détourner votre appareil. »

Une fois connecté, l'attaquant devient le maître à bord. Il peut injecter son propre son à un volume assourdissant, couper vos appels, ou pire, activer le microphone pour écouter vos conversations ambiantes à votre insu. L'aspect le plus pernicieux concerne la localisation. Les chercheurs ont découvert que certains modèles, notamment chez Google et Sony, peuvent être exploités pour traquer physiquement la victime. Si vos écouteurs n'ont pas été préalablement liés à un compte Google (par exemple, si vous êtes un utilisateur d'iPhone qui utilise des écouteurs tiers) un pirate peut lier l'accessoire à son propre compte Google via l'attaque.

Dès lors, vos écouteurs deviennent une balise de suivi dans le réseau “Localiser mon appareil” de Google. Le pirate peut suivre vos déplacements en temps réel sur une carte. Bien que Google et Apple aient mis en place des alertes pour prévenir le harcèlement, la victime recevrait une notification indiquant qu'elle est suivie par... ses propres écouteurs. La plupart des utilisateurs, pensant à un bug, ignoreraient probablement l'alerte, laissant le champ libre au stalker. Google a réagi en publiant un bulletin de sécurité et en déployant des correctifs pour ses propres appareils et pour le système Android. L'histoire ne s'arrête pourtant pas là. Les chercheurs ont déjà trouvé un moyen de contourner ce correctif concernant le traçage, prouvant que le jeu du chat et de la souris est loin d'être terminé.

Le problème structurel réside dans la nature même des objets connectés. Contrairement à votre smartphone ou votre ordinateur, qui vous harcèlent pour faire leurs mises à jour, vos enceintes et écouteurs restent souvent sur leur firmware d'origine. Pour vous protéger, vous devez généralement télécharger une application spécifique au fabricant (comme l'appli Sony ou JBL) pour installer les correctifs. Soyons honnêtes, la grande majorité des consommateurs ignorent même que ces applications existent ou que leurs écouteurs ont besoin de mises à jour logicielles. Tant qu’elles ne sont pas effectuées, les vulnérabilités persistent. Les chercheurs avertissent que des millions d'appareils resteront probablement vulnérables pendant des mois, voire des années.

L'origine du problème semble être un mélange de spécifications techniques mal interprétées par les fabricants de puces et de faiblesses dans le standard Fast Pair lui-même. Bien que Google certifie ces appareils, les tests n'ont visiblement pas suffi à détecter ces aberrations de sécurité, comme le fait qu'un appareil déjà couplé accepte une nouvelle connexion sans authentification forte. Alors, que faire ? La recommandation immédiate est de vérifier si vos accessoires audio disposent d'une application compagnon et de forcer une mise à jour du firmware dès aujourd'hui.

Au-delà du correctif technique, WhisperPair nous rappelle une vérité fondamentale de l'ère numérique, la commodité a un prix. En voulant supprimer les frictions technologiques pour nous faciliter la vie, les constructeurs suppriment parfois les barrières qui nous protègent. Comme le conclut le chercheur Nikola Antonijević: « La commodité ne devrait pas signifier moins de sécurité. »

Casi marzo ya y aún no había escrito un resumen de 2025, así que me pongo a ello. Va a ser un resumen somero por varias razones:

1. La mayoría de juegos los he jugado en BGA, que ofrece generalmente una sensación distinta a las que se buscaba cuando fueron diseñados, así que mi opinión está sesgada. Jugar por turnos hace que sea difícil pillar las dinámicas y ver las estrategias favorables. Aunque en la imagen que acompaña al post aparezcan muchos juegos con una única partida, puede que el número de partidas que haya jugado sea mayor, pero si lo hago digitalmente sólo apunto una.
2. Se ve también en la imagen que tampoco he repetido mucho, por lo que la experiencia puede ser limitada.
3. No va a ser un texto en profundidad sobre cada juego, así que ni aún cuando sí crea que tenga experiencia con los juegos, es un buen análisis.
4. Esto lo hago para hacer dos chistes e intentar generar interés o curiosidad por si alguien se anima a jugar.

Voy a agrupar algunos títulos en categorías porque si no estoy aquí hasta mañana.

• Juegos de deducción que parecía que sí, pero no: Orapa Mine, Zoogitives, KronoLogic, Digit Code. Yo entiendo que no todos los juegos de deducción pueden ser Búsqueda del planeta X, pero esperaba que estos fuesen juegos, y no un Clues By Sam nivel Medium, ni siquiera Tricky. Que me encanta Clues By Sam, para hacer aún mientras desayuno, la única victoria segura del día, oye, pero no es una caja que ocupa lugar en casa y es un dinero y hay que hacer con gente para, en última instancia, estar pensando en silencio y ya el colmo de KronoLogic, que sean casos que no se pueden rejugar y no se reinician a media noche NY time.
• Combate de judo contra un profesional: Tuve un profesor de ed. física en el instituto que fue entrenador profesional de judo, y como anteriormente había hecho karate, me cogía como voluntario para explicar los ejercicios de las 2 clases que vimos judo. Pues me hizo una contractura en el cuello. Esa es la sensación que se debe tener en un buen juego para 2, la de que alguien que sepa te puede reventar el cuello aunque aún no hayas empezado. Tampoco digo que sea una sensación maravillosa, pero hay algunos juegos que me la han dado, incluso en la primera partida por internet: Agent Avenue, Duel for Cardia, Stalk Exchange, Herbaceous, Mythicals, Tag Team, Pagan y Nanga Parbat, con mención especial para este último porque es bastante minimalista en su funcionamiento y eso me gusta. Bueno, es que realmente podría estar en un tipo de juego que normalmente es para 2, como son los abstractos, donde no hay ningún azar y toda la información es pública. Se ve que he jugado poco este año, y solo están aquí Trench (en BGA hay varios portugueses que invitan a cualquiera que haya jugado alguna vez a ese juego en su lucha por ser el número 1), Hive, Kamon, Yinsh, Carpniches y Medu, siendo mis favoritos Kamon y Yinsh por el buen ratio entre parafernalia y profundidad.
• Modas en los juegos de mesa modernos que no traen nada bueno: Entiendo que esto además de ser un medio cultural implica cuestiones económicas y logísticas que van más allá de que los creadores tengan un sustento para vivir, con lo que muchos de los problemas vienen de que la gente quiere comer y el porcentaje de beneficios se reduce cuando hay una cadena tan grande. Aún así, tiendo a mirar con recelo que, como sucede en videojuegos o el caso flagrante del cine, las principales apuestas sean retematizaciones de juegos antiguos, copias más o menos descaradas o mejunjes de las cuatro cosas que funcionan en un momento dado, pero con más plástico. Quicir, reaprovechar para comer me parece bien, pero hacerlo con un juego que atenta contra el medio ambiente por la cantidad de plástico ya no. En esta categoría está Crafting the cosmos y ya. Un juego de crear una galaxia y vida, porque la actual se ha quemado para producir tales materiales. Bueno, realmente hay más juegos en esta categoría que podría ser que para este viaje no hacía falta semejantes flamantes alforjas, como Coffee Rush, Cathood, Coatl, Four Gardens, Monolith Arena, Pergola, Pioneer Days, Piña Coladice, Pyramido, Spectacular, The Game Makers. Juegos (casi) todos ellos con algo positivo, pero creo que no con la suficiente originalidad o interés como para justificar traerlos desde China.
• Refritos con buen sofrito: Al igual que pienso que la tendencia que he comentado en el punto anterior significa el estancamiento del medio, también hay buenos diseños, ya sea porque encajan bien el tema del juego, de manera que sea más sencillo entender las reglas, o bien porque encuentran cómo usar una mecánica de manera que el puzzle resulte realmente interesante: Fromage (a quién no le va a gustar hacer quesos), Pirates of Maracaibo (un concentrado del juego Maracaibo, que ya comenté que me gustaba, pero como los dueños de la editorial en español son fascistas, pues no se van a llevar mi dinero) que conserva todas sus propiedades y The White Castle (¡tomas 9 decisiones en el juego y ya desde la primera sabes que has metido la pata, como cuando cada día te levantas de la cama para currar!)
• Ah, es cierto, esto eran los juegos de mesa: Simple, efectivo, pensar mucho sin que parezca que hay ningún motivo, como al comer techo por la noche. Arboretum, GlassRoad, Kilauea, Livingstone, Mexica Skull Kingy y, el mejor para mí en este aspecto este año, Tower Up.
• Tampoco pasa nada si te lo pasas bien: No siempre está disponible la opción de no quedar con mucha gente, y un servidor no tiene voz como para explicar un juego medianamente complejo a más de tres personas que no pongan de su parte manteniendo silencio, así que también hay que considerar juegos de pocas reglas y que incluso pueden hacer que lo pases bien: Hitster, Smart10 (por favor, STOP Trivial) y, el juego más proclive a querer echar otra partida tras perder estrepitosamente la primera, Carnival of Sins.

Ya sé que medir todo no es lo mejor para la cabeza y tal, pero también es bueno hacer check, y es una forma de comprobar si tiene sentido comprar según qué juegos para que estén pillando polvo. Y esto tiene como resultado saber que he jugado menos a menos juegos distintos (también está sesgado por cómo apunto las partidas online), así que tocará aprender más juegos este año.

Cuadrícula

Para 2026 me he propuesto varios retos, como jugar al menos una partida a todos los juegos que tenga en casa con reglas para 1 jugador, así no tengo excusa de no tener amigüitos y me fuerzo a no perder el tiempo de maneras menos satisfactorias.

Y eso es más o menos todo el resumen, ¡pasadlo bien!

Tags: #boardgames #juegosdemesa

Skiathos är en grekisk ö som ofta beskrivs som liten till ytan men stor i upplevelser. Här möts frodig natur och klart, ljusblått hav på ett sätt som känns både lättillgängligt och genuint. Ön är känd för sin gröna vegetation, sina många sandstränder och sin avslappnade atmosfär där semesterlivet får ta plats utan att kännas stressigt. Samtidigt finns ett levande vardagsliv med små tavernor, hamnpromenader och byar där tempot är lugnt men aldrig sömnigt. Kombinationen av naturskönhet, badvänliga stränder och grekisk charm gör Skiathos till en plats som passar lika bra för total avkoppling som för den som vill upptäcka nya miljöer i sin egen takt.

Skiathos är en av de grekiska öar där stränderna inte bara är många, utan också väldigt olika varandra. Det gör att ön passar lika bra för den som vill ha stillhet och natur som för den som söker liv, musik och rörelse vid havet.

En av de mest älskade stränderna är Koukounaries, ofta beskriven som en av Medelhavets vackraste sandstränder. Den långa, mjuka sanden sluttar långsamt ner i ett klart och lugnt hav, och bakom stranden breder en grön pinjeskog ut sig som ger både skugga och en speciell doft som hör platsen till. Trots sin popularitet känns stranden sällan stressig, och det är lätt att hitta sin egen rytm här.

En helt annan upplevelse väntar vid Lalaria, som nästan känns mer som ett naturfenomen än en traditionell strand. De vita klipporna, de runda stenarna och det mjölkigt turkosa vattnet skapar ett dramatiskt landskap som etsar sig fast i minnet. Eftersom stranden bara nås med båt blir besöket ofta kort men intensivt, och känslan av att ha kommit till en avlägsen plats är stark redan när man kliver i land.

För den som uppskattar öppna ytor och ett lugnare tempo är Mandraki ett utmärkt val. Här möts man av sanddyner, vidsträckt strand och ett hav som kan vara både spegelblankt och lekfullt beroende på vinden. Atmosfären är avslappnad och naturlig, och stranden passar lika bra för långa promenader som för stillsamt badande.

Agia Eleni är känd för sitt varma ljus och sina solnedgångar som färgar himlen i mjuka toner av orange och rosa. Det är en strand som inbjuder till att stanna kvar längre än planerat, kanske med något kallt i glaset medan dagen sakta övergår i kväll. Kombinationen av fin sand, lugnt vatten och en behaglig stämning gör den till en favorit för många.

Vill man istället ha mer puls och energi är Banana Beach svår att motstå. Här finns musik, strandbarer och vattensporter som ger platsen en livlig och social karaktär. Samtidigt är vattnet klart och inbjudande, vilket gör att stranden fungerar både för bad och för den som vill umgås och känna semesterkänslan på hög volym.

Si vous pensiez que la période de l'efficacité chez Meta était terminée, détrompez-vous. Mark Zuckerberg et sa garde rapprochée viennent de dévoiler leur dernière arme pour presser le citron jusqu'à la dernière goutte avec un nouveau système d'évaluation baptisé “Checkpoint”. Sous couvert de simplification administrative et de récompenses financières alléchantes, ce programme, qui entrera en vigueur d’ici mi-2026, semble surtout marquer l'avènement d'une culture d'entreprise impitoyable où la compétition interne prime sur la collaboration.

Selon des documents internes obtenus par Business Insider, l’entreprise américaine promet désormais des bonus pouvant atteindre 300% du salaire de base pour une poignée d'élus. C'est le miroir aux alouettes classique, agiter une carotte dorée pour faire courir l'ensemble de la meute plus vite. Mais derrière ces chiffres qui donnent le tournis se cache une mécanique bien plus sombre, celle d'un darwinisme corporatif assumé qui ne laisse aucune place à l'erreur.

Le nouveau système divise les employés en quatre catégories distinctes. D'un côté, l'élite, les “Outstanding” (environ 20% des effectifs) qui toucheront un multiplicateur de 200% et une infime minorité recevant le nouveau “Meta Award” avec un multiplicateur de 300%. De l'autre, la masse laborieuse classée “Excellent” (environ 70%), qui recevra 115% de son bonus cible. L'excellence est donc devenue la norme, le minimum syndical. Ce qui était autrefois une performance louable est désormais considéré comme le point de départ, la ligne de base.

Mais le véritable danger réside dans le bas du classement. Environ 10% des employés se retrouveront dans les catégories “Needs Improvement” (50% de bonus) ou “Not Meeting Expectations” (0% de bonus). Dans un contexte où Meta a récemment exigé de ses managers qu'ils classent de force 15 à 20% de leurs équipes dans les catégories inférieures, ce nouveau système ressemble moins à un outil de développement qu'à un algorithme de licenciement déguisé. Être classé dans ces catégories revient pratiquement à recevoir une notification de préavis.

Pour vendre cette pilule amère, la direction utilise l'argument fallacieux de la bureaucratie. Le mémo interne déplore que les managers passent 80 heures par an sur les évaluations et que les employés perdent collectivement 330 000 heures en feedbacks. L'objectif officiel est de sauver du temps. En réalité, en réduisant l'importance des retours entre pairs, Meta élimine l'un des derniers remparts d'humanité et de nuance dans l'évaluation du travail.

Le passage à deux cycles d'évaluation complets par an (milieu et fin d'année) avec la même échelle de notation ne va pas réduire la pression, bien au contraire. Il va instaurer un climat de surveillance perpétuelle. Les employés ne pourront plus jamais relâcher la pression. Ils seront constamment sur la sellette, jugés tous les six mois avec la menace implicite de voir leur bonus fondre ou leur poste disparaître. C'est l'institutionnalisation du stress chronique.

Ce virage n'est pas là par hasard. Il trouve sa place dans une tendance lourde de la Silicon Valley, où Google et Amazon durcissent également leurs processus d'évaluation. Mais chez Meta, le cynisme atteint des sommets. Après avoir licencié des milliers de personnes et qualifié 2025 d'année “intense”, l'entreprise transforme ses bureaux en arène de gladiateurs.

En promettant des sommes astronomiques aux “super-performants”, elle brise la cohésion d'équipe. Pourquoi aider un collègue si cela risque de permettre à ce dernier de vous voler votre place dans le top 20% ? Ce système “Checkpoint” est conçu pour extraire le maximum de productivité par la peur et l'appât du gain, sacrifiant au passage le bien-être mental des salariés et la culture de l'entraide. Sous les dehors brillants d'une réforme moderne, c'est un retour aux méthodes de management les plus archaïques et déshumanisantes.

JOURNAL 15 janvier 2026

Je suis devant Tôdai, ma princesse, mon soleil va apparaître sous peu, éblouissant la nuit, chassant l’ombre autour d'elle. J’ai eu une grande consultation aujourd'hui, je ne reviendrai plus voir mes psy avant un mois, puis on verra disent-ils, mais peut-être plus du tout. J’ai cerné et éclairci mon dernier problème, le plus profond, ça s'est fait tout seul, tranquillement pendant les vacances et ces jours derniers, je suis capable de le voir maintenant clairement et calmement. J'en parlerai plus tard. C'est drôle j'avais totalement étouffé ce trauma-là, plus profondément blessant que tous les autres. Je développerai. On m'a fait des compliments insensés aujourd’hui, que je ne répéterai pas, en résumé je suis physiquement une “athlète discrète” et mon mental est celui d'un moine zen, je suis “désespérément saine”. J’ai réussi tous les tests, je n'ai aucun trouble psychologique, j'avais juste une accumulation de traumas empilés et se masquant les uns les autres. Les psys me disent que sans eux j'aurai certainement réussi à tout régler seule, mes mécanismes mentaux me le permettaient ça m'aurait juste demandé plus de temps et aussi de douleur.

* * *

Je suis en mesure maintenant d’en parler J’ai vu et compris quel était mon traumatisme majeur, celui qui a dépassé tous les autres et que j'ai refoulé au point de l'oublier totalement sous l'empilement des traumas successifs. je peux le regarder calmement maintenant de manière objective et dépassionnée. À partir de la mort de maman je me suis accrochée à mon frère aîné malgré sa dureté malgré les coups. Je suis devenue une enfant prodige du sabre pour lui plaire. Il était devenu ma référence, le point central de mon univers. J'avais pour lui un amour total. Ce jour que sortant d’une profonde dépression d'un an après le viol, je n'avais pas encore 16 ans, devant toute l'assemblée familiale les cadres de l'entreprise et autres réunis pour la cérémonie anniversaire du décès de mon grand-père, le criminel de guerre, soudain j'ai pris la parole pour dénoncer ce qu'on m'avait fait subir. Je m'attendais à être soutenue, consolée par mon modèle… au contraire répondant à la rage de mon père ce sont mes frères, l'aîné en tête qui m'ont fait taire, maîtrisée dans ma colère et enfermée dans le placard du garage. Là dans le noir et l´incertitude du sort qu'on me réservait, mon cœur s'est brisé, je me suis effondrée comme une poupée de chiffon. J'étais incapable de pleurer depuis ces jours où mon entraînement interdisait toute plainte toute larme. Le choc était si violent que mon esprit a créé un masque, fermé la porte de ce souvenir. Tout m'est revenu, tranquillement, comme un vieux film oublié petit à petit en douceur pendant nos vacances. J'ai aimé follement mon frère et il m'avait trahi froidement, mécaniquement, sur ordre de mon père probablement, lui ne m'avait jamais vraiment aimé d'ailleurs et certainement pas avec l'intensité que moi j'y avais mise. C’est sans doute la vraie raison qui m'a conduite à le provoquer et me battre avec lui il y a quelques années le bokken en main faute de tirer le sabre en vrai. Je pensais devoir lui en parler, et puis il m'apparaît clairement que non je n’en ai pas le droit. Il culpabilise déjà énormément à cause de ce qu'on m'a fait je ne veux pas rajouter ma peine, d’ailleurs évacuée, à la sienne. Je respire librement maintenant. Le passé ne pèse plus sur mon âme je n’ai plus de cauchemars, plus d´hallucinations éveillée, ma pensée est claire, il n’y a plus de recoins obscurs, je ne crains plus mes démons, la lumière dans mon cœur les a chassés. Je suis heureuse en compagnie de la femme que j’aime plus que tout au monde plus que moi-même et qui m'aime en retour sans limite. Je vois son sourire calme tandis qu’elle travaille sur son laptop. Je la regarde et mon amour explose dans mon cœur des larmes d’amour me viennent. Vous connaissez ça les larmes d'amour ?

#douleur

I feel like I’ve written about this before, but I had a really really good gym session with E today. We left around midnight, and it was 1 hr 40 minutes of legs, including 4 sets of bulgarian split squats. I felt so fucking alive. I almost cried at home while I told E about music and just art overall. Fuck man I’m happy to be alive.

Je viens de finir une BD, Punk à sein de Magali Le Huche.

Je lis très souvent des témoignages de maladies en BD, je pourrais en faire un très gros article. (Un jour. En attendant je vous en mets quelques-uns à la fin).

L’autrice parisienne raconte son cancer du sein, sans utiliser les termes de “warrior”, ce genre de vocabulaire malvenu quand en vérité c’est la loterie devant l’issue.

Les phases de tout va bien aller, les phases où l’on fait semblant, celles où l’on est au fond du bac : tout est abordé, qu’est-ce qui fait mal, le rapport à son corps, les regrets. Les chirurgiens cons, ceux qui sont super, la salle de réveil.

Le fantôme de la mamie qui a eu un cancer jeune, qui n’en a jamais parlé et toute cette honte qu’elle portait. C’était pas mieux avant, non.

Les proches de Magali sont super, mais elle croise et raconte des patientes qui se font larguer illico.

(D’ailleurs, les statistiques de séparation selon le genre n’ont pas l’air si tranchées que ça. Mais si quelqu’un peut m’aider à comprendre ces pourcentages…).

Les passages les plus sympas sont sur ses copines de cancer et leurs “cafés nichons”. Tout de suite, une vieille amie l’appelle, une autre amie la met en relation avec une amie à elle. C’est tout bête, mais je n’aurais pas eu spontanément l’idée.

Le titre a un sens particulier : j’ai mis les Clash en fond, obligée. Quand certain’es se tournent vers la spiritualité, l’autrice évacue son trop-plein avec le punk. Et avec l’histoire des Clash, qui s’élevaient contre les injustices sociales. C’est inattendu, parler frontalement politique et musique dans ce genre de témoignage.

Les remerciements finissent sur l’importance des services publics. “Vive l’hôpital public”.

Que survivent les services publics à cette BD de 2025, ce serait bien, oui.

____

Les BD de témoignages qui me viennent à l’esprit :

Globules et conséquences de Catherine Pioli. Sur sa leucémie, c’est très pédagogique et j’aime beaucoup le ton et le trait.

Le très connu mais finalement pas tant que ça (offrez le aux soignant’es autour de vous…) Goupil ou face de Lou Lubie sur la cyclothymie et la bipolarité. Ici aussi, très pédagogique. Et pas un ton lourd. (Journal d’une bipolaire est bien plus rude à lire mais témoigne d’une expérience plus floue du diagnostic).

Sur le diabète, L’escroqueuse est magistral. Expérience individuelle avec les effets secondaires et la difficulté des symptômes, le déni… Mais aussi la mainmise des laboratoires sur les traitements et toutes les injustices engendrées. Ça parle du diabète de type 1, celui qu’on a enfant (le type 2 étant acquis adulte).

Et je finis, malgré de nombreuses tentations (je n’ai qu’à jeter un oeil sur mes étagères) par les BD de Juliette Mercier sur sa maladie de Crohn. Beaucoup d’humour de dérision, mais pas de voile pudique sur les symptômes et leur impact.

Bonnes lectures !

tenía la impresión de que era un simple aficionado no un profesional de este circo al que llaman vida por eso / en justicia se dió dos estrellas

Jogja.. Though you’ve changed, I still return again, To gentle city lights falling softly on my pain. Though the space gets smaller, and life is getting harder, There are wounds only this place can make calmer. Jogja, though your shape transforms a thousand times, Your spirit still survives.

Jogja tetap istimewa. Now and forever, You’re home for me.

Beyond the Chiron Gate version 1.1.7 is now live! As well as fixing the backlog of minor bugs, this also adds some blank space at the top if it's running on a phone with a camera set into the screen, so the inset should no longer hide part of the top interface bar.

1.1.7 PATCH NOTES

• Layout should now adapt for phone screens with a camera inset at the top
• Several typo fixes
• Fixed a couple of discoveries with no tooltip

#BeyondTheChironGate #bugfix

In July 2024, African Union ministers gathered in Accra, Ghana for the 45th Ordinary Session of the Executive Council. Their agenda included a document that had been two years in the making: the Continental Artificial Intelligence Strategy. When they endorsed it, something remarkable happened. Africa had, for the first time, articulated a collective vision for artificial intelligence governance that explicitly rejected the one-size-fits-all approach emanating from Brussels and Washington. The strategy called for “adapting AI to African realities,” with systems that “reflect our diversity, languages, culture, history, and geographical contexts.”

Commissioner Amani Abou-Zeid, who leads the African Union's infrastructure and energy portfolio, framed the endorsement as both timely and strategic. The document represented years of expert consultations, technical committee reviews, and ministerial negotiations. It positioned Africa not as a passive recipient of global technology standards but as a continent capable of authoring its own governance vision.

Yet the celebration was tempered by a sobering reality. Even as African nations crafted their own vision, the European Union's AI Act had already entered into force on 1 August 2024, establishing what many expect to become the de facto global standard. Companies doing business with European markets must comply regardless of where they are headquartered. The compliance costs alone, estimated at approximately 52,000 euros annually per high-risk AI model according to a 2021 EU study, represent a significant barrier for technology firms in developing economies. This figure comprises roughly 29,000 euros for internal compliance requirements such as documentation and human oversight, plus 23,000 euros for external auditing costs related to mandatory conformity assessments. The penalties for non-compliance are even more daunting: fines up to 35 million euros or 7 per cent of annual turnover for the most serious violations.

This is the new architecture of power in the age of artificial intelligence. And for nations across the Global South, it poses a question that cuts to the heart of sovereignty itself: when wealthy nations establish regulatory frameworks that claim universal applicability while embedding distinctly Western assumptions about privacy, individual autonomy, and acceptable risk, does adoption by developing countries constitute genuine choice or something more coercive?

The Mechanics of Regulatory Hegemony

The phenomenon has a name: the Brussels Effect. Coined by Anu Bradford, the Henry L. Moses Professor of Law and International Organization at Columbia Law School, the term describes the European Union's extraordinary ability to shape global markets through unilateral regulation. Bradford, who also serves as Director of the European Legal Studies Center at Columbia and a senior scholar at the Columbia Business School's Chazen Institute for Global Business, published her foundational research on this topic in 2012. Her 2020 book expanding the concept was recognised by Foreign Affairs as one of that year's most important works, with reviewer Andrew Moravcsik calling it “the single most important book on Europe's influence to appear in a decade.”

Bradford's research demonstrates how EU standards become entrenched in legal frameworks across both developed and developing markets, leading to what she calls a “Europeanization” of global commerce. The Brussels Effect manifests in two forms: de facto, when companies universally follow EU rules to standardise products across markets, and de jure, when formal legislation is passed in other countries aligning with EU law. Both dynamics serve to expand the reach of European regulatory philosophy far beyond the continent's borders.

The mechanism is deceptively simple. The EU represents approximately 450 million consumers with significant purchasing power. Companies seeking access to this market must comply with EU regulations. Rather than maintaining separate product lines for different jurisdictions, multinational corporations typically adopt EU standards globally. It proves more economical to build one product that meets the strictest requirements than to maintain parallel systems for different regulatory environments. Local firms in developing countries that wish to participate in supply chains or partnerships with these multinationals then find themselves adopting the same standards by necessity rather than choice.

The General Data Protection Regulation offers a preview of how this dynamic unfolds. Since its implementation in 2018, GDPR-style data protection laws have proliferated worldwide. Brazil enacted its Lei Geral de Protecao de Dados. India has implemented personal data protection legislation. South Africa, Kenya, and dozens of other nations have followed suit with laws that closely mirror European frameworks. Within two years of GDPR's enactment, major technology companies including Meta and Microsoft had updated their global services to comply, making European privacy standards the effective baseline for much of the digital world.

The question of whether these adoptions represented genuine policy preferences or structural compulsion remains contested. Supporters point to the genuine harms of unregulated data collection and the value of strong privacy protections. Critics note that the costs and administrative requirements embedded in these frameworks often exceed the capacity of smaller nations and companies to implement, effectively forcing adoption of Brussels-designed solutions rather than enabling indigenous alternatives.

The AI Act appears positioned to follow a similar trajectory. Countries including Canada, Brazil, and South Korea are already developing AI governance frameworks that borrow heavily from the EU's risk-based classification system. Canada's proposed Artificial Intelligence and Data Act, in development since 2022, mirrors Europe's approach. Brazil's AI bill, approved by the Senate in late 2024, classifies systems as excessive, high, or lower risk in direct parallel to the EU model. South Korea's AI Basic Act, passed in December 2024, borrows the EU's language of “risk” and “transparency,” though it stops short of mandating third-party audits. The Atlantic Council has noted that the Act “sets the stage for global AI governance,” while researchers at Brookings observe that its influence extends far beyond formal adoption, shaping how companies worldwide develop and deploy artificial intelligence systems.

The Values Embedded in Code and Compliance

To understand why this matters, one must examine what precisely gets encoded in these regulatory frameworks. The EU AI Act is not simply a neutral set of technical standards. It embodies specific philosophical commitments about the relationship between individuals, technology, and the state.

At its foundation lies an emphasis on individual rights, transparency, and human oversight. These principles emerge from a distinctly Western liberal tradition that prioritises personal autonomy and treats privacy as an individual entitlement rather than a collective concern. The Act's risk classification system divides AI applications into four tiers: unacceptable risk, high risk, limited risk, and minimal risk. This categorisation reflects assumptions shaped by European historical experiences, particularly around surveillance, discrimination, and the protection of fundamental rights as articulated in the EU Charter.

Practices deemed unacceptable and therefore prohibited include AI systems designed for subliminal manipulation, those exploiting vulnerabilities of specific groups, social scoring by public authorities, and certain forms of biometric identification. High-risk applications, subject to extensive compliance requirements, include AI in critical infrastructure, education, employment, law enforcement, and migration management. These categories reflect European priorities: the continent's twentieth-century experiences with totalitarianism and state surveillance have shaped particular sensitivity to government overreach and discriminatory classification systems.

But these categories may not map neatly onto the priorities and experiences of other societies. Research published in AI and Society in 2025, examining perspectives from practitioners in both Global North and Global South contexts, found that “global debates on artificial intelligence ethics and governance remain dominated by high-income, AI-intensive nations, marginalizing perspectives from low- and middle-income countries and minoritized practitioners.” The study documented how power asymmetries shape not only who participates in governance discussions but what counts as legitimate ethical concern in the first place.

Scholars at Chatham House have been more direct. In a 2024 analysis of AI governance and colonialism, researchers argued that “while not all European values are bad per se, the imposition of the values of individualism that accompany Western-developed AI and its regulations may not be suitable in communities that value communal approaches.” The report noted that the regulatory power asymmetry between Europe and Africa “that is partly a historical legacy may come into play again where AI regulation is concerned.”

Consider how different cultural frameworks might approach AI governance. The African concept of Ubuntu, increasingly discussed in technology ethics circles, offers a fundamentally different starting point. Ubuntu, a word meaning “human-ness” or “being human” in Zulu and Xhosa languages, emphasises that personhood is attained through interpersonal and communal relations rather than individualist, rational, and atomistic endeavours.

As Sabelo Mhlambi, a Fellow at Harvard's Berkman Klein Center for Technology and the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, has argued, Ubuntu's relational framework suggests that personhood is constituted through interconnection with others rather than through individual rational autonomy. Mhlambi, a computer scientist whose research examines the ethical implications of technology in the developing world, uses this framework to argue that the harms caused by artificial intelligence are in essence violations of Ubuntu's relational model. His work proposes shifting the focus of AI governance from protecting individual rationality to maintaining the relationality between humans.

The implications for AI governance are significant. Where European frameworks emphasise protecting individual users from algorithmic harm, a Ubuntu-informed approach might prioritise how AI systems affect community bonds and collective wellbeing. Where GDPR treats data as individual property requiring consent for use, communitarian perspectives might view certain data as belonging to communities or future generations. These are not merely academic distinctions. They represent fundamentally different visions of what technology governance should accomplish.

The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, in a 2021 Resolution, called upon State Parties to give serious consideration to African “values, norms and ethics” in the formulation of AI governance frameworks, explicitly identifying Ubuntu and communitarian ethos as components of such indigenous values. The UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, adopted by 193 member states in November 2021, includes what scholars have termed an “Ubuntu paragraph” acknowledging these alternative frameworks. But acknowledgment is not the same as incorporation into binding regulatory standards.

The Infrastructure of Dependency

The challenge facing developing nations extends beyond philosophical differences. The material requirements of AI governance create their own forms of dependency.

Consider the compliance infrastructure that the EU AI Act demands. High-risk AI systems must undergo conformity assessments, maintain extensive documentation, implement human oversight mechanisms, and submit to regulatory review. Providers must establish risk management systems, maintain detailed technical documentation, keep comprehensive logs of system operation, and ensure accuracy, robustness, and cybersecurity. They must register in an EU-wide database and submit to post-market monitoring requirements. The European Commission's own impact assessment estimated that compliance would add approximately 17 per cent overhead to AI development costs. For well-resourced technology companies in California or London, these requirements represent a manageable expense. For startups in Nairobi or Mumbai, they may prove prohibitive.

The numbers tell a stark story of global AI inequality. According to analysis from the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, developing countries account for less than 10 per cent of global AI patents as of 2024. The projected 15.7 trillion dollar contribution of AI to the global economy by 2030, a figure widely cited from PwC analysis, is expected to flow disproportionately to nations that already dominate the technology sector. Without sufficient capacity to participate in AI development and governance, many Global South countries may find themselves relegated to the role of rule-takers rather than rule-makers.

Infrastructure gaps compound the challenge. India, despite generating roughly one-fifth of the world's data according to estimates from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, holds only about 3 per cent of global data centre capacity. The nation is, in the language of one CSIS analysis, “data rich but infrastructure poor.” Sub-Saharan Africa faces even more severe constraints. Only one quarter of the population has access to reliable internet, and a 29 per cent gender gap exists in mobile phone usage.

The energy requirements of AI infrastructure often exceed what fragile power grids can support. The International Energy Agency estimates that global data centre electricity consumption reached 415 terawatt-hours in 2024, approximately 1.5 per cent of worldwide electricity demand, with this figure expected to triple by 2035. To put that in perspective, the total energy consumption of households in sub-Saharan Africa is expected to reach between 430 and 500 terawatt-hours by 2030. Training a single frontier-scale AI model can consume thousands of megawatt-hours, a burden many power grids in developing nations simply cannot support.

Investment is beginning to flow. AWS opened a cloud region in Cape Town in 2020, adding approximately 673 million dollars to South Africa's GDP according to company estimates. Google launched a Johannesburg cloud region in early 2024. Microsoft and Abu Dhabi-based G42 are investing 1 billion dollars in a geothermal-powered data campus in Kenya. Yet these investments remain concentrated in a handful of countries, leaving most of the continent dependent on foreign infrastructure.

Against this backdrop, the option to develop indigenous AI governance frameworks becomes not merely a regulatory choice but a question of resource allocation. Should developing nations invest limited technical and bureaucratic capacity in implementing frameworks designed in Brussels? Or should they pursue alternative approaches better suited to local conditions, knowing that divergence from EU standards may limit access to global markets and investment?

Historical Echoes and Structural Patterns

For scholars of development and international political economy, these dynamics have a familiar ring. The parallels to previous episodes of regulatory imposition are striking, if imperfect.

The TRIPS Agreement, concluded as part of the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations in the early 1990s, offers a particularly instructive comparison. That agreement required all World Trade Organisation members to implement minimum standards for intellectual property protection, standards that largely reflected the interests of pharmaceutical and technology companies in wealthy nations. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has documented how campaigns of unilateral economic pressure under Section 301 of the US Trade Act played a role in defeating alternative policy positions favoured by developing countries including Brazil, India, and Caribbean Basin states.

Developing countries secured transition periods and promises of technical assistance, but the fundamental architecture of the agreement reflected power asymmetries that critics described as neo-colonial. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development documented that implementing TRIPS required “significant improvements, adaptation and enlargement of legal, administrative and particularly enforcement frameworks, as well as human resource development.” The Doha Declaration of 2001, which clarified that TRIPS should not prevent states from addressing public health crises through compulsory licensing and other mechanisms, came only after intense developing country advocacy and a global campaign around access to medicines for HIV/AIDS.

Research from the Dharmashastra National Law University's Student Law Journal argues that “the adoption of AI laws by countries in the Global South perpetuates the idea of continuing colonial legacies. Such regulatory models adopted from the Global North are not reflective of the existing needs of native societies.” The analysis noted that while African states have not been formally coerced into adopting EU regulations, they may nonetheless choose to comply to access European markets, “in much the same way as some African states have already adopted European cyber governance standards.”

A 2024 analysis published in the National Institutes of Health database examining decolonised AI governance in Sub-Saharan Africa found that “the call for decolonial ethics arises from long-standing patterns of extractive practices and power consolidation of decision-making authority between the Global North and Global South.” The researchers documented how “the infrastructures and data economies underpinning AI often replicate earlier colonial patterns of resource and labor extraction, where regions in the Global South provide data, annotation work, and computational resources while deriving limited benefit.”

Abeba Birhane, an Ethiopian-born cognitive scientist now at Trinity College Dublin and a Senior Fellow in Trustworthy AI at the Mozilla Foundation, has developed the concept of “algorithmic colonisation” to describe how Western technology companies' expansion into developing markets shares characteristics with historical colonialism. Her research, which earned her recognition as one of TIME's 100 most influential persons in AI for 2023, documents how “traditional colonialism has been driven by political and government forces; algorithmic colonialism, on the other hand, is driven by corporate profits. While the former used brute force domination, colonialism in the age of AI takes the form of 'state-of-the-art algorithms' and 'AI solutions' to social problems.”

Competing Visions and Emerging Alternatives

Yet the story is not simply one of imposition and acquiescence. Across the Global South, alternative approaches to AI governance are taking shape, demonstrating that multiple regulatory paradigms are possible.

India offers perhaps the most developed alternative model. The India AI Governance Guidelines, developed under the IndiaAI Mission and released for public consultation in 2025, explicitly reject the need for comprehensive AI-specific legislation at this stage. Instead, they advocate a “techno-legal model” in which law and technology co-evolve, allowing compliance to be “verifiable by design rather than enforced ex post.” The guidelines note that existing laws on information technology, data protection, consumer protection, and statutory civil and criminal codes can address many AI-related risks. Rather than creating an entirely new regulatory apparatus, the framework proposes building on India's existing digital public infrastructure.

The approach reflects India's distinctive position. The nation hosts the world's largest digital identity system, Aadhaar, which has enrolled over 1.3 billion residents. It operates the biggest digital payments system by volume through the Unified Payments Interface. According to the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Index Report 2025, India ranks second globally in AI skill penetration from 2015 to 2024. Rather than importing the regulatory architecture of the EU, Indian policymakers are building on existing digital public infrastructure to create governance frameworks suited to local conditions. The framework establishes an AI Governance Group for overall policy formulation and coordination across agencies, while sector-specific regulators like the Reserve Bank of India handle domain-specific rules.

The Indian framework explicitly positions itself as an alternative model for the Global South. Through the G20 Digital Economy Working Group, India has proposed extending its digital public infrastructure model into an international partnership, a logic that could be applied to AI governance as well. India's leadership of the Global Partnership on AI, culminating in the 2024 New Delhi Summit, demonstrated that developing nations can shape global discussions when they participate from positions of technical and institutional strength.

Singapore has pursued yet another approach, prioritising innovation through voluntary frameworks rather than prescriptive mandates. Singapore's National Artificial Intelligence Strategy 2.0, launched in December 2023, commits over 1 billion Singapore dollars over five years to advance AI capabilities. The Model AI Governance Framework for Generative AI, developed in consultation with over 70 global organisations including Microsoft, OpenAI, and Google, establishes nine dimensions for responsible AI deployment without imposing mandatory compliance requirements.

This flexibility has enabled Singapore to position itself as a governance innovation hub. In February 2025, Singapore's Infocomm Media Development Authority and the AI Verify Foundation launched the Global AI Assurance Pilot to codify emerging norms for technical testing. In late 2024, Singapore conducted the world's first multilingual AI safety red-teaming exercise focused on the Asia-Pacific, bringing together over 350 participants from 9 countries to test large language models for cultural bias. Singapore is also working with Rwanda to develop a Digital Forum of Small States AI Governance Playbook, recognising that smaller nations face unique challenges in AI governance.

China, meanwhile, has developed its own comprehensive governance ecosystem that operates entirely outside the EU framework. The AI Safety Governance Framework, released in September 2024 by China's National Technical Committee 260 on Cybersecurity, takes a fundamentally different approach to risk classification. Rather than dividing AI systems into risk levels, it categorises the types of risks themselves, distinguishing between inherent risks from the technology and risks posed by its application. Beijing's approach combines tiered supervision, security assessments, regulatory sandboxes, and app-store enforcement.

These divergent approaches matter because they demonstrate that multiple regulatory paradigms are possible. The question is whether developing nations without China's market power or India's technical capacity will have the space to pursue alternatives, or whether market pressures and institutional constraints will channel them toward EU-style frameworks regardless of local preferences.

The Institutional Preconditions for Genuine Choice

What would it take for developing countries to exercise meaningful sovereignty over AI governance? The preconditions are formidable but not impossible.

First, and most fundamentally, developing nations require technical capacity. This means not only the engineering expertise to develop AI systems but the regulatory expertise to evaluate their risks and benefits. Currently, the knowledge needed to assess AI systems is concentrated overwhelmingly in wealthy nations. Building this capacity requires sustained investment in education, research institutions, and regulatory bodies, investments that compete with other urgent development priorities including healthcare, infrastructure, and climate adaptation.

The African Union's Continental AI Strategy recognises this challenge. Its implementation timeline extends from 2025 to 2030, with the first phase focused on “establishing governance structures, creating national AI strategies, and mobilizing resources.” UNESCO has provided technical and financial support for the strategy's development and implementation planning. Yet even with this assistance, the strategy faces significant obstacles. Analysis of 18-month implementation data reveals stark geographic concentration, with 83 per cent of funding concentrated in four countries: Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, and Egypt.

Total tech funding for Africa reached 2.21 billion dollars in 2024, down 22 per cent from the previous year according to industry tracking. Of this, AI-specific startups received approximately 400 to 500 million dollars. These figures, while growing, remain a fraction of the investment flowing to AI development in North America, Europe, and China. Local initiatives are emerging: Johannesburg-based Lelapa AI launched InkubaLM in September 2024, a small language model focused on five African languages including Swahili, Hausa, Yoruba, isiZulu, and isiXhosa. With only 0.4 billion parameters, it performs comparably to much larger models, demonstrating that efficient, locally-relevant AI development is possible.

Second, developing nations need platforms for collective action. Individual countries lack the market power to resist regulatory convergence toward EU standards, but regional blocs potentially offer countervailing force. The African Union, ASEAN, and South American regional organisations could theoretically develop common frameworks that provide alternatives to Brussels-designed governance.

Some movement in this direction is visible. ASEAN countries have been developing AI guidelines that, while borrowing elements from the EU approach, also reflect regional priorities around national development and ecosystem building. Southeast Asian nations have generally adopted a wait-and-see approach toward global regulatory trends, observing international developments before crafting their own frameworks. The African Union's strategy explicitly calls for unified national approaches among member states and encourages cross-border data sharing to support AI development. Yet these regional initiatives remain in early stages, lacking the enforcement mechanisms and market leverage that give EU regulations their global reach.

Third, and perhaps most controversially, developing nations may need to resist the framing of alternative regulatory approaches as “races to the bottom” or “regulatory arbitrage.” The discourse surrounding AI governance often assumes that weaker regulation necessarily means exploitation and harm. This framing can delegitimise genuine attempts to develop governance frameworks suited to different conditions and priorities.

There is a legitimate debate about whether communitarian approaches to data governance, or more permissive frameworks for AI experimentation, or different balances between innovation and precaution, represent valid alternative visions or merely excuses for corporate exploitation. But foreclosing this debate by treating EU standards as the benchmark of responsible governance effectively denies developing nations the agency to make their own assessments.

The Question of Epistemology

At the deepest level, the challenge facing the Global South is epistemological. Whose knowledge counts in defining what responsible AI looks like?

Current governance frameworks draw primarily on Western philosophical traditions, Western academic research, and Western institutional expertise. The major AI ethics guidelines, the prominent research institutions, the influential think tanks and policy organisations, these are concentrated overwhelmingly in North America and Western Europe. When developing countries adopt frameworks designed in these contexts, they are not simply accepting regulatory requirements. They are accepting particular ways of understanding technology, society, and the relationship between them.

The concept of Ubuntu challenges the assumption that ethical frameworks should centre on individual rights and protections. As scholars in Ethics and Information Technology have argued, “under the African ethics of Ubuntu, for an individual to fully become a person, her positive relations with others are fundamental. Personhood is attained through interpersonal and communal relations, rather than individualist, rational and atomistic endeavours.” This stands in stark contrast with Western philosophy, where individual autonomy, rationality, and prudence are considered crucial for personhood.

Governance in liberal democracies of the Global North focuses primarily on protecting autonomy within the individual private sphere. Ubuntu-informed governance would take a different starting point, focusing on how systems affect relational bonds and collective flourishing. The implications extend beyond abstract ethics to practical questions of AI design, deployment, and oversight.

Similar challenges come from other philosophical traditions. Indigenous knowledge systems, religious frameworks, and non-Western philosophical schools offer distinct perspectives on questions of agency, responsibility, and collective action that current AI governance frameworks largely ignore. Safiya Umoja Noble, the David O. Sears Presidential Endowed Chair of Social Sciences at UCLA and a 2021 MacArthur Fellow, has documented how search algorithms and AI systems embed particular cultural assumptions that disadvantage marginalised communities. Her research challenges the idea that technology platforms offer neutral playing fields.

The Distributed AI Research Institute, founded by Timnit Gebru in 2021 with 3.7 million dollars in foundation funding from the Ford Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Kapor Center, and Open Society Foundation, represents one effort to create space for alternative perspectives. DAIR prioritises work that benefits Black people in Africa and the diaspora, documents the effects of AI on marginalised groups, and operates explicitly outside the influence of major technology companies. One of the institute's initial projects analyses satellite imagery of townships in South Africa using AI to better understand legacies of apartheid.

The question is whether global AI governance can genuinely pluralise or whether structural pressures will continue to centre Western perspectives while marginalising alternatives. The experience of previous regulatory regimes, from intellectual property to data protection, suggests that dominant frameworks tend to reproduce themselves even as they claim universal applicability.

The Stakes of the Present Moment

The decisions made in the next few years will shape global AI governance for decades. The EU AI Act implementation timeline extends through 2027, with major provisions taking effect incrementally. Prohibited AI practices became applicable in February 2025. Governance rules for general-purpose AI models took effect in August 2025. Rules for high-risk AI systems have an extended transition period until August 2027. The African Union's strategy runs to 2030. India's guidelines are just beginning their implementation journey. These overlapping timelines create a critical window in which the architecture of global AI governance will solidify.

For developing nations, the stakes extend beyond technology policy. The question of whether they can exercise genuine sovereignty over AI governance is ultimately a question about the structure of the global order itself. If the answer is no, if structural pressures channel developing countries toward Western regulatory frameworks regardless of local preferences, then the promise of a multipolar world in which diverse societies chart their own paths will have proven hollow in the very domain most likely to shape the coming century.

The alternative is not isolation or rejection of global standards. It is the creation of governance architectures that genuinely accommodate plurality, that treat different societies' preferences as legitimate rather than deviant, and that build capacity for developing nations to participate as authors rather than merely adopters of global norms. The Global Partnership on AI, now hosting 44 member countries across six continents, represents one forum where such pluralism might develop. The partnership explicitly aims to welcome developing and emerging economies committed to responsible AI principles.

Whether such alternatives can emerge remains uncertain. The forces favouring convergence toward EU-style frameworks are powerful: market pressures from companies standardising on EU-compliant products, institutional constraints from international organisations dominated by wealthy nations, capacity asymmetries that make it easier to adopt existing frameworks than develop new ones, and the sheer momentum of existing regulatory trajectories. But the growing articulation of alternative visions, from the African Union's Continental Strategy to India's techno-legal model to academic frameworks grounded in Ubuntu and other non-Western traditions, suggests that the debate is far from settled.

The Global South's response to Western AI governance frameworks will not be uniform. Some nations will embrace EU standards as pathways to global market access and signals of regulatory credibility. Others will resist, developing indigenous approaches better suited to local conditions and philosophical traditions. Most will pursue hybrid strategies, adopting elements of Western frameworks while attempting to preserve space for alternative approaches.

What is certain is that the framing of these choices matters. If developing nations are seen as simply choosing between responsible regulation and regulatory arbitrage, the outcome is predetermined. If, instead, they are recognised as legitimate participants in a global conversation about how societies should govern artificial intelligence, the possibilities expand. The architecture of AI governance can either reproduce historical patterns of dependency or open space for genuine pluralism. The choices made now will determine which future emerges.

---

References and Sources

African Union. “Continental Artificial Intelligence Strategy.” African Union, August 2024. https://au.int/en/documents/20240809/continental-artificial-intelligence-strategy

African Union. “African Ministers Adopt Landmark Continental Artificial Intelligence Strategy.” African Union Press Release, June 2024. https://au.int/en/pressreleases/20240617/african-ministers-adopt-landmark-continental-artificial-intelligence-strategy

Birhane, Abeba. “Algorithmic Colonization of Africa.” Oxford Academic, 2020. https://academic.oup.com/book/46567/chapter/408130272

Bradford, Anu. “The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World.” Oxford University Press, 2020. Columbia Law School Faculty Profile: https://www.law.columbia.edu/faculty/anu-bradford

Brookings Institution. “The EU AI Act will have global impact, but a limited Brussels Effect.” Brookings, 2024. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-eu-ai-act-will-have-global-impact-but-a-limited-brussels-effect/

Centre for European Policy Studies. “Clarifying the costs for the EU's AI Act.” CEPS, 2024. https://www.ceps.eu/clarifying-the-costs-for-the-eus-ai-act/

Chatham House. “Artificial intelligence and the challenge for global governance: Resisting colonialism.” Chatham House, 2024. https://www.chathamhouse.org/2024/06/artificial-intelligence-and-challenge-global-governance/06-resisting-colonialism-why-ai

CSIS. “From Divide to Delivery: How AI Can Serve the Global South.” Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2025. https://www.csis.org/analysis/divide-delivery-how-ai-can-serve-global-south

Dharmashastra National Law University. “Challenging the Coloniality in Global AI Regulation Frameworks.” Student Law Journal, 2024. https://dnluslj.in/challenging-the-coloniality-in-global-ai-regulation-frameworks/

European Commission. “AI Act: Shaping Europe's Digital Future.” European Commission, 2024. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/regulatory-framework-ai

Government of India. “India AI Governance Guidelines.” Ministry of Electronics and IT, 2025. https://indiaai.gov.in/article/india-ai-governance-guidelines-empowering-ethical-and-responsible-ai

Harvard Kennedy School. “From Rationality to Relationality: Ubuntu as an Ethical and Human Rights Framework for Artificial Intelligence Governance.” Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, 2020. https://carrcenter.hks.harvard.edu/publications/rationality-relationality-ubuntu-ethical-and-human-rights-framework-artificial

IAPP. “Global AI Governance Law and Policy: Singapore.” International Association of Privacy Professionals, 2025. https://iapp.org/resources/article/global-ai-governance-singapore

IMDA Singapore. “Model AI Governance Framework 2024.” Infocomm Media Development Authority, 2024. https://www.imda.gov.sg/resources/press-releases-factsheets-and-speeches/press-releases/2024/public-consult-model-ai-governance-framework-genai

Mhlambi, Sabelo. Harvard Berkman Klein Center Profile. https://cyber.harvard.edu/people/sabelo-mhlambi

Noble, Safiya Umoja. UCLA Faculty Profile. https://seis.ucla.edu/faculty/safiya-umoja-noble/

OECD. “Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence.” OECD, 2024. https://www.oecd.org/en/about/programmes/global-partnership-on-artificial-intelligence.html

PMC. “Decolonizing global AI governance: assessment of the state of decolonized AI governance in Sub-Saharan Africa.” National Institutes of Health, 2024. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11303018/

PMC. “The role of the African value of Ubuntu in global AI inclusion discourse.” National Institutes of Health, 2022. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9023883/

Springer. “Ethics of AI in Africa: Interrogating the role of Ubuntu and AI governance initiatives.” Ethics and Information Technology, 2025. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-025-09834-5

Springer. “Understanding AI and power: situated perspectives from Global North and South practitioners.” AI and Society, 2025. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-025-02731-x

Stanford University. “Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence Index Report.” Stanford HAI, 2025. https://hai.stanford.edu/

Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. “How Leaders in the Global South Can Devise AI Regulation That Enables Innovation.” Institute for Global Change, 2024. https://institute.global/insights/tech-and-digitalisation/how-leaders-in-the-global-south-can-devise-ai-regulation-that-enables-innovation

UNCTAD. “The TRIPS Agreement.” United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/ite1_en.pdf

UNESCO. “Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence.” UNESCO, 2021. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/recommendation-ethics-artificial-intelligence

Washington Post. “Timnit Gebru launches DAIR, her new AI ethics research institute.” Washington Post, December 2021. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/12/02/timnit-gebru-dair/

White and Case. “AI Watch: Global regulatory tracker – China.” White and Case LLP, 2024. https://www.whitecase.com/insight-our-thinking/ai-watch-global-regulatory-tracker-china

---

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

There is a kind of loneliness that does not come from being physically alone. It comes from feeling emotionally unclaimed. It is the ache of knowing there are people all around you and yet feeling as though no one is truly standing with you. It is the quiet grief of having no one to call when the day has broken you open. It is the feeling of being a stranger even in rooms filled with familiar faces. This kind of loneliness has haunted humanity since the beginning, and for millions of people it feels like a permanent condition rather than a temporary season. It is the loneliness that whispers, “You don’t belong anywhere.”

Not everyone gets a family in the way we imagine families are supposed to be. Some people are born into chaos rather than care. Some grow up in homes where words were used as weapons instead of bridges. Some learned to walk on emotional eggshells instead of being allowed to rest. Some were forced to become adults before they ever got to be children. Some were never chosen, never protected, never celebrated. And even if they later build success or stability, the orphaned part of their heart still wonders if anyone would notice if they disappeared.

This is why the idea of belonging carries so much power. Belonging is not just about proximity. It is about being known and still wanted. It is about being seen and still accepted. It is about having a place where you do not have to perform to earn your right to exist. The human soul is not designed to survive on independence alone. We are wired for connection. We are wired for relationship. We are wired for home.

When God looked at creation in Genesis and said it was not good for man to be alone, He was not merely commenting on the absence of a romantic partner. He was identifying a spiritual truth about human nature. We were made to live in communion. We were made to be held by something larger than ourselves. We were made to be part of a family, not just a crowd.

This is why Jesus did something so radical when He came to earth. He did not come to create a hierarchy. He came to create a household. He did not gather fans. He gathered brothers and sisters. He did not build a platform. He built a table. And around that table, He invited people who had been rejected everywhere else.

The disciples themselves were not impressive men. They were not powerful. They were not elite. They were ordinary, overlooked, and in many cases broken. Some were fishermen who were tired of being invisible. One was a tax collector who had become hated by his own people. Some were impulsive and unstable. Some were fearful and doubting. And yet Jesus looked at them and said, “Come, follow me.” Not because they had earned it. Not because they were worthy. But because love calls people before it changes them.

This is what real family does. It does not wait for you to be fixed before it welcomes you in. It welcomes you in so that healing can begin.

The early church understood this in a way we often forget today. When the Holy Spirit came in Acts, something more than miracles was born. A community was born. People who had nothing in common on the surface suddenly found themselves bound together by something deeper than culture, status, or background. They ate together. They prayed together. They shared what they had. They carried one another when someone fell. They cried together. They rejoiced together. They became family.

Scripture tells us that they were known for their love for one another. Not their arguments. Not their perfection. Not their organization. Their love. The church grew not because it was impressive, but because it felt like home.

This is the heartbeat behind everything we do here. Not everybody has a family. But here, we are a family.

That is not a slogan. It is a spiritual reality. When people gather around faith, hope, and the pursuit of God, something sacred forms. A bond emerges that goes beyond geography and beyond bloodlines. It is the bond of shared longing, shared healing, and shared faith.

If you are new here, you are not walking into something that you need to prove yourself worthy of. You are walking into something God already prepared for you. You did not stumble here by accident. You were led here because your heart was searching for something it could trust.

And if you have been here for a while, your presence matters more than you know. Even when you feel small. Even when you feel invisible. Even when you wonder if anyone notices you. Heaven notices you. God notices you. And this family notices you in ways you may not yet realize.

Psalm 68 tells us that God sets the lonely in families. That verse is not poetic. It is prophetic. It speaks to the way God restores what life has stolen. It speaks to the way He places people into spaces where their brokenness can be held rather than hidden.

For some people, their biological families were safe. For others, they were the place where the deepest wounds were inflicted. God is not limited to bloodlines when He builds families. Sometimes He uses faith to create what biology never provided.

There are people reading this right now who had to become strong because no one else was there. People who learned to survive on their own because depending on others led to disappointment or pain. People who still flinch when someone gets too close. People who keep one foot out the door just in case. God knows that part of you. And He is gentle with it.

Belonging does not happen overnight. It happens when trust slowly learns to breathe again.

That is what this space is meant to be. A place where your guard can lower. A place where your faith can grow. A place where your story is safe. A place where you do not have to pretend you are okay when you are not.

Jesus once redefined family in a way that stunned the people around Him. When someone told Him His mother and brothers were outside, He looked at the people sitting with Him and said that whoever does the will of His Father is His family. In other words, spiritual kinship can be just as real as biological kinship. Faith binds hearts together in ways blood never could.

That is why what we are building here matters. It is not about content. It is about connection. It is not about views. It is about value. It is not about numbers. It is about names.

You have a name. You have a story. You have a place here.

Some of you watch quietly. Some of you comment. Some of you pray in silence. Some of you are just trying to survive the day. All of you belong.

And in a world that keeps telling people they are disposable, that kind of belonging is sacred.

There is a moment in almost every human life when the noise of the world fades and the truth rises up. It usually happens late at night. It might happen when the house is quiet, when the phone is finally still, when the day’s distractions no longer have the power to keep the deeper questions away. That is when the heart begins to speak. And what it says is almost always the same thing in different words: “I just want to belong somewhere.”

People can survive poverty. They can survive hardship. They can survive grief and disappointment and even trauma. What breaks the human spirit is not pain alone. It is pain experienced alone. It is the feeling that no one sees, no one hears, no one stands with you in the middle of it. That is why isolation is so dangerous. It convinces people they are on their own when God is trying to bring them home.

The family God builds does not look like a television sitcom. It looks like a group of imperfect people learning how to love one another in the middle of real life. It looks like patience being practiced when someone is slow to heal. It looks like grace being extended when someone falls. It looks like prayers whispered when words are too heavy to speak out loud. It looks like showing up again and again even when it would be easier to walk away.

This is the kind of family Jesus creates.

Jesus never minimized people’s pain, but He never allowed pain to have the final word either. When He met people who had been rejected, ignored, or cast aside, He did not lecture them about their failures. He restored their dignity. He gave them back their sense of worth. He reminded them that they were still chosen.

That is what real belonging does. It does not just make you feel included. It makes you feel alive again.

Many people spend their lives trying to earn what should have been freely given. They work harder. They achieve more. They chase approval. They collect success. But none of it quiets the deep voice that says, “Do I matter to anyone?” Belonging is not built on accomplishment. It is built on acceptance.

God does not invite you into His family because you are impressive. He invites you because you are His.

That truth changes everything.

It means you do not have to be perfect to be loved. It means you do not have to be strong to be valued. It means you do not have to have it all together to be welcomed.

You just have to be willing to come.

Some of you have been hurt so many times that you have stopped expecting anything good from people. You have learned to keep your heart guarded. You have learned to stay quiet. You have learned to survive without asking for help. God is not disappointed in you for that. He understands how you got there. But He does not want you to stay there.

Healing begins when you realize you do not have to do life alone anymore.

That is why what we are building here is sacred. It is not a crowd. It is a community. It is not an audience. It is a family. It is a place where faith is shared, where hope is nurtured, and where broken people are treated with gentleness instead of judgment.

Every prayer spoken here matters. Every message shared here matters. Every quiet soul listening right now matters.

You matter.

Somewhere along the way, many people were taught that they were too much, too needy, too emotional, too complicated. They learned to shrink themselves to fit into spaces that could not hold them. God does not ask you to shrink. He invites you to be fully seen.

In God’s family, your tears are not a problem. Your questions are not a threat. Your wounds are not an inconvenience.

They are part of your story, and your story is welcome here.

That is why when we say this is a family, we mean it. We mean that you do not have to pretend. We mean that you do not have to hide. We mean that you do not have to walk through life carrying everything by yourself anymore.

You have brothers and sisters here. You have people who care, even if you have never met them face to face. You have a place where your faith can grow without fear.

And even on the days when you feel like you do not belong anywhere else in the world, you belong here.

That is the heart of God. That is the spirit of this community. That is the promise of family.

No matter where you came from. No matter what you have been through. No matter what you are carrying right now.

You are not alone anymore.

You are home.

Watch Douglas Vandergraph’s inspiring faith-based videos on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/@douglasvandergraph

Support the ministry by buying Douglas a coffee https://www.buymeacoffee.com/douglasvandergraph

Your friend, Douglas Vandergraph

In Summary: * Listening now to the IU Hoosiers pregame show ahead of the women's basketball game between the Washington Huskies and the Indiana Hoosiers. Tipoff is about half an hour away. When the game ends I'll work on my night prayers and head to bed soon after.

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= 220.90 lbs. * bp= 126/79 (66)

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

Diet: * 06:40 – ½ Whataburger double-cheeseburger sandwich, bacon, oatmeal * 11:45 – 1 peanut butter sandwich * 12:15 – 1 bowl of liver and vegetables stew

Activities, Chores, etc.: * 05:00 – listen to local news talk radio * 06:10 – bank accounts activity monitored * 06:20 – read, pray, follow news reports from various sources, surf the socials, nap * 14:20 – watching old eps. of “Classic Doctor Who” on Pluto TV * 15:20 – now listening to “The Jack Riccardi Show” * 17:00 – tuning now to B97 – The Home for IU Women's Basketball to listen to the pregame show then the call of tonight's women's basketball game between the Washington Huskies and the Indiana Hoosiers.

Chess: * 12:40 – moved in all pending CC games

Finally figure out the Cisco SSH FreeBSD problem. Not being able to connect to the switch because Cisco uses old “insecure” ddiffie-hellman-group1-sha1. And the cure is...

Host switch, router HostkeyAlgorithms +ssh-rsa PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms +ssh-rsa Ciphers +aes128-cbc

Switch* is the name of your prefix switches and router* is the prefix name.

:–)

Got the typewriter to work!

Didn't realize the amount of muscle it would necessitate just to type a sentence. Wholly unpractical as a writing instrument, but I can see myself incorporating it into some mixed media art on paper, or into some of my mixed media pocket journaling.

In other news:

• Finished the thank you portraits that go into the back end of THE SOLAR GRID collected edition, and received the foreword from someone very dear to me. Still waiting on the introduction and afterword, after which all the material for the book should more or less be complete.

• Things fell apart with the publisher lined up for TIMES NEW HUMAN, so have to start reconsidering the best route to release it.

• PROJECT ROSEWATER which started at the tail end of 2025 is trudging along but seems to have hit a rough patch.

• GANZEER.COM updates still underway and are likely to carry on till the end of next week, by which point work on my kitchen just might also be complete.

• There is talk of a project that involves some travel towards the end of February. We shall see.

#journal