In this essay, Austrian psychiatrist Viktor E. Frankl reports his experience in concentration camps under the Third Reich. He also elaborates on logotherapy, a new psychotherapy method he based on the importance of the meaning of one's life.

I read Primo Levi's If This Is A Man ages ago but it's always shocking to read about the atrocities that occurred during Nazi Germany. Of course, there is the never-ending list of crimes perpetrated by the regime, notably the arbitrary executions, the starving, the enslavement, the beatings, the extremely dire life conditions and all-around dehumanisation of the prisoners, but I had forgotten some things, for example, that a number of companies used forced labour from the camps, despite these individuals looking clearly unwell.

Frankl gives the most earnest account possible and articulates his existentialist perspective on the horror. He believes that someone who could find meaning in their suffering was more likely to survive. He recalls seeing several inmates going through a mental breakdown and giving up only to die mere days later, like a psychic death preceding the physical one. Of course, a lot of the prisoners, whether they could find meaning or not, could not escape their fate, because those in charge had decided to kill them for whatever reason. Frankl relates escaping death several times, not out of wit but out of pure luck. The importance of meaning appears as well when Frankl got arbitrarily beaten. Suffering is one thing but suffering for no valid reason is even worse.

In that respect, Frankl's book is an important account of what happened and we need to remember what atrocities a fascist regime can commit because, of course, we need to prevent it from happening again. That said, despite some good insights, I was expecting more from the logotherapy part. This is not a scientific treatise, it's just an outline of an approach, but it's an interesting collection of views.

We got holiday money from my partner’s mom and my dad, so I spent more at the Local Art Supply than I probably should have. One of the things was a set of pencils – six different hardnesses. Not a huge set, but it gives me a chance to figure out shading and texturing. Also picked up some blending stumps. And some colored pencils. And some print stuff.

Also went to the Art Thrift Store. Somehow got lucky enough to find a huge square of lino for like $2, and a smaller chunk for $1. Both had drawing on it, but not cut into, so very easy to ignore what’s there. I’m so stoked! And an upgraded brayer and baren! Such a great haul today.

Here’s my first doodle with my new pencils. A little lumpy, a little off-center – not entirely unlike my first pottery.

The morning routine at King's Stockholm studio starts like countless other game development houses: coffee, stand-ups, creative briefs. But buried in the daily workflow is something extraordinary. Whilst designers and artists sketch out new puzzle mechanics for Candy Crush Saga, AI systems are simultaneously reworking thousands of older levels, tweaking difficulty curves and refreshing visual elements across more than 18,700 existing puzzles. The human team focuses on invention. The machines handle evolution.

This isn't the dystopian AI takeover narrative we've been sold. It's something stranger and more nuanced: a hybrid creative organism where human imagination and machine capability intertwine in ways that challenge our fundamental assumptions about authorship, craft, and what it means to make things.

Welcome to the new creative pipeline, where 90% of game developers already use AI in their workflows, according to 2025 research from Google Cloud surveying 615 developers across the United States, South Korea, Norway, Finland, and Sweden. The real question isn't whether AI will reshape creative industries. It's already happened. The real question is how studios navigate this transformation without losing the human spark that makes compelling work, well, compelling.

The Hybrid Paradox

Here's the paradox keeping creative directors up at night: AI can accelerate production by 40%, slash asset creation timelines from weeks to hours, and automate the mind-numbing repetitive tasks that drain creative energy. Visionary Games reported exactly this when they integrated AI-assisted tools into their development process. Time to produce game assets and complete animations dropped 40%, enabling quicker market entry.

But speed without soul is just noise. The challenge isn't making things faster. It's making things faster whilst preserving the intentionality, the creative fingerprints, the ineffable human choices that transform pixels into experiences worth caring about.

“The most substantial moat is not technical but narrative: who can do the work of crafting a good story,” according to research from FBRC.ai. This insight crystallises the tension at the heart of hybrid workflows. Technology can generate, iterate, and optimise. Only humans can imbue work with meaning.

According to Google Cloud's 2025 research, 97% of developers believe generative AI is reshaping the industry. More specifically, 95% report AI reduces repetitive tasks, with acceleration particularly strong in playtesting and balancing (47%), localisation and translation (45%), and code generation and scripting support (44%).

Yet efficiency divorced from purpose is just busy work at machine speeds. When concept art generation time drops from two weeks to 48 hours, the question becomes: what do artists do with the 12 days they just gained? If the answer is “make more concept art,” you've missed the point. If the answer is “explore more creative directions, iterate on narrative coherence, refine emotional beats,” you're starting to grasp the hybrid potential.

Inside the Machine-Augmented Studio

Walk into a contemporary game studio and you'll witness something that resembles collaboration more than replacement. At Ubisoft, scriptwriters aren't being automated out of existence. Instead, they're wielding Ghostwriter, an in-house AI tool designed by R&D scientist Ben Swanson to tackle one of gaming's most tedious challenges: writing barks.

Barks are the throwaway NPC dialogue that populates game worlds. Enemy chatter during combat. Crowd conversations in bustling marketplaces. The ambient verbal texture that makes virtual spaces feel inhabited. Writing thousands of variations manually is creative drudgery at its finest.

Ghostwriter flips the script. Writers create a character profile and specify the interaction type. The AI generates paired variations. Writers select, edit, refine. The system learns from thousands of these choices, becoming more aligned with each studio's creative voice. It's not autonomous creation. It's machine-assisted iteration with humans firmly in the director's chair.

The tool emerged from Ubisoft's La Forge division, the company's R&D arm tasked with prototyping and testing technological innovations in collaboration with games industry experts and academic researchers. Swanson's team went further, creating a tool called Ernestine that enables narrative designers to create their own machine learning models used in Ghostwriter. This democratisation of AI tooling within studios represents a crucial shift: from centralised AI development to distributed creative control.

The tool sparked controversy when Ubisoft announced it publicly. Some developers took to social media demanding investment in human writers instead. Even God of War director Cory Barlog tweeted a sceptical reaction. But the criticism often missed the implementation details. Ghostwriter emerged from collaboration with writers, designed to eliminate the grunt work that prevents them from focusing on meaningful narrative beats.

This pattern repeats across the industry. At King, AI doesn't replace level designers. It enables them to maintain over 18,700 Candy Crush levels simultaneously, something Todd Green, general manager of the franchise, describes as “extremely difficult” without AI taking a first pass. Since acquiring AI startup Peltarion in 2022, King's team potentially improves thousands of levels weekly rather than several hundred, because automated drafting frees humans to focus on creative decisions.

“Doing that for 1,000 levels all at once is very difficult by hand,” Green explained. The AI handles the mechanical updates. Humans determine whether levels are actually fun, an intangible metric no algorithm can fully capture.

The Training Gap Nobody Saw Coming

Here's where the transformation gets messy. According to Google Cloud's 2025 research, 39% of developers emphasise the need to align AI use with creative vision and goals, whilst another 39% stress the importance of providing training or upskilling for staff on AI tools. Yet a 2024 Randstad survey revealed companies adopting AI have been lagging in actually training employees how to use these tools.

The skills gap is real and growing. In 2024, AI spending grew to over $550 billion, with an expected AI talent gap of 50%. The creative sector faces a peculiar version of this challenge: professionals suddenly expected to become prompt engineers, data wranglers, and AI ethicists on top of doing their actual creative work.

The disconnect between AI adoption speed and training infrastructure creates friction. Studios implement powerful tools but teams lack the literacy to use them effectively. This isn't a knowledge problem. It's a structural one. Traditional creative education doesn't include AI pipeline management, prompt engineering, or algorithmic bias detection. These competencies emerged too recently for institutional curricula to catch up.

The most forward-thinking studios are addressing this head-on. CompleteAI Training offers over 100 video courses and certifications specifically for game developers, with regular updates on new tools and industry developments. MIT xPRO's Professional Certificate in Game Design teaches students to communicate effectively with game design teams whilst creating culturally responsive and accessible games. Upon completion, participants earn 36 CEUs and a certificate demonstrating their hybrid skillset.

UCLA Extension launched “Intro to AI: Reshaping the Future of Creative Design & Development,” specifically designed to familiarise creative professionals with AI's transformative potential. These aren't coding bootcamps. They're creative augmentation programmes, teaching artists and designers how to wield AI as a precision tool rather than fumbling with it as a mysterious black box.

The Job Metamorphosis

The employment panic around AI follows a familiar pattern: technology threatens jobs, anxiety spreads, reality proves more nuanced. Research indicates a net job growth of 2 million globally, as AI has created approximately 11 million positions despite eliminating around 9 million.

But those numbers obscure the real transformation. Jobs aren't simply disappearing or appearing. They're mutating.

Freelance platforms like Fiverr and Upwork show rising demand for “AI video editors,” “AI content strategists,” and the now-infamous “prompt engineers.” Traditional roles are accreting new responsibilities. Concept artists need to understand generative models. Technical artists become AI pipeline architects. QA testers evolve into AI trainers, feeding models new data and improving accuracy.

New job categories are crystallising. AI-enhanced creative directors who bridge artistic vision and machine capability. Human-AI interaction designers who craft intuitive interfaces for hybrid workflows. AI ethics officers who navigate the thorny questions of bias, authorship, and algorithmic accountability. AI Product Managers who oversee strategy, design, and deployment of AI-driven products.

The challenge is acute for entry-level positions. Junior roles that once served as apprenticeships are disappearing faster than replacements emerge, creating an “apprenticeship gap” that threatens to lock aspiring creatives out of career pathways that previously provided crucial mentorship.

Roblox offers a glimpse of how platforms are responding. Creators on Roblox earned $923 million in 2024, up 25% from $741 million in 2023. At RDC 2025, Roblox announced they're increasing the Developer Exchange rate, meaning creators now earn 8.5% more when converting earned Robux into cash. The platform is simultaneously democratising creation through AI tools like Cube 3D, a foundational model that generates 3D objects and environments directly from text inputs.

This dual movement, lowering barriers whilst raising compensation, suggests one possible future: expanded creative participation with machines handling technical complexity, freeing humans to focus on imagination and curation.

The Unsexy Necessity

If you want to glimpse where hybrid workflows stumble, look at governance. Or rather, the lack thereof.

Studios are overwhelmed with AI integration requests. Many developers have resorted to “shadow AI”, using unofficial applications without formal approval because official channels are too slow or restrictive. This creates chaos: inconsistent implementations, legal exposure, training data sourced from questionable origins, and AI outputs that nobody can verify or validate.

The EU AI Act arrived in 2025 like a regulatory thunderclap, establishing a risk-based framework that applies extraterritorially. Any studio whose AI systems are used by players within the EU must comply, regardless of the company's physical location. The Act explicitly bans AI systems deploying manipulative or exploitative techniques to cause harm, a definition that could challenge common industry practices in free-to-play and live-service games.

Studios should conduct urgent and thorough audits of all engagement and monetisation mechanics through the lens of the EU AI Act. Proactive audits for AI Act compliance matter. Studios shouldn't wait for regulatory enforcement to act.

Effective governance requires coordination across disciplines. Technical teams understand AI capabilities and limitations. Legal counsel identifies regulatory requirements and risk exposure. Creative leaders ensure artistic integrity. Business stakeholders manage commercial and reputational concerns.

For midsized and larger studios, dedicated AI governance committees are becoming standard. These groups implement vendor assessment frameworks evaluating third-party AI providers based on data security practices, compliance capabilities, insurance coverage, and service level guarantees.

Jim Keller, CEO of Tenstorrent, identifies another governance challenge: economic sustainability. “Current AI infrastructure is economically unsustainable for games at scale. We're seeing studios adopt impressive AI features in development, only to strip them back before launch once they calculate the true cloud costs at scale.”

The Copyright Minefield

Here's where hybrid workflows get legally treacherous. US copyright law requires a “human author” for protection. Works created entirely by AI, with no meaningful human contribution, receive no copyright protection. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed in Thaler v. Perlmutter on 18 March 2025 that human authorship is a bedrock requirement, and artificial intelligence systems cannot be deemed authors.

Hybrid works exist in murkier territory. The Copyright Office released guidance on 29 January 2025 clarifying that even extremely detailed or complex prompts don't confer copyright ownership over AI-generated outputs. Prompts are instructions rather than expressions of creativity.

In the Copyright Office's view, generative AI output is copyrightable “where AI is used as a tool, and where a human has been able to determine the expressive elements they contain.” What does qualify? Human additions to, or arrangement of, AI outputs. A comic book “illustrated” with AI but featuring added original text by a human author received protection for the arrangement and expression of images plus any copyrightable text, because the work resulted from creative human choices.

The practical implication: hybrid workflows with AI plus human refinement offer the safest approach for legal protection.

Globally, approaches diverge. A Chinese court found over 150 prompts plus retouches and modifications resulted in sufficient human expression for copyright protection. Japan's framework assesses “creative intention” and “creative contribution” as dual factors determining whether someone used AI as a tool.

The legal landscape remains in flux. Over 50 copyright lawsuits currently proceed against AI companies in the United States. In May 2025, the U.S. Copyright Office released guidance suggesting AI training practices likely don't qualify as fair use when they compete with or diminish markets for original human creators.

Australia rejected a proposed text and data mining exception in October 2025, meaning AI companies cannot use copyrighted Australian content without permission. The UK launched a consultation proposing an “opt-out” system where copyrighted works can be used for AI training unless creators explicitly reserve rights. The consultation received over 11,500 responses and closed in February 2025, with creative industries largely opposing and tech companies supporting the proposal.

Studios Getting It Right

Theory and policy matter less than implementation. Some studios are navigating hybrid workflows with remarkable sophistication.

Microsoft's Muse AI model, revealed in early 2025, can watch footage from games like Bleeding Edge and generate gameplay variations in the engine editor. What previously required weeks of development now happens in hours. Developers prototype new mechanics based on real-world playstyles, collapsing iteration cycles.

Roblox's approach extends beyond tools to cultural transformation. At RDC 2025, they announced 4D object creation, where the fourth dimension is “interaction.” Creators provide a prompt like “a sleek, futuristic red sports car,” and the API delivers a functional, interactive vehicle that can be driven, with doors that open. This transcends static asset generation, moving into fully interactive scripted assets.

In March 2025, Roblox launched a new Mesh Generator API, powered by its 1.8-billion-parameter model “CUBE 3D”, enabling creators to auto-generate 3D objects on the platform. The platform's MCP Assistant integration revolutionises asset creation and team collaboration. Developers can ask Assistant to improve code, explain sections, debug issues, or suggest fixes. New creators can generate entire scenes by typing prompts like “Add some streetlights along this road.”

Ubisoft uses proprietary AI to generate environmental assets, decreasing production times by up to 80% whilst allowing designers to focus on creative direction. Pixar integrates AI within rendering pipelines to optimise workflows without compromising artistic vision.

These implementations share common characteristics. AI handles scale, repetition, and optimisation. Humans drive creative vision, narrative coherence, and emotional resonance.

The Indie Advantage

Conventional wisdom suggests large studios with deep pockets would dominate AI adoption. Reality tells a different story.

According to a 2024 survey by a16z Games, 73% of U.S. game studios already use AI, with 88% planning future adoption. Critically, smaller studios are embracing AI faster, with 84% of respondents working in teams of fewer than 20 people. The survey reveals 40% report productivity gains over 20%, whilst 25% experience cost savings above 20%.

Indie developers face tighter budgets and smaller teams. AI offers disproportionate leverage. Tripledot Studios, with 12 global studios and 2,500+ team members serving 25 million+ daily users, uses Scenario to power their art team worldwide, expanding creative range with AI-driven asset generation.

Little Umbrella, the studio behind Death by AI, reached 20 million players in just two months. Wishroll's game Status launched in limited access beta in October 2024, driven by TikTok buzz to over 100,000 downloads. Two weeks after public beta launch in February 2025, Status surpassed one million users.

Bitmagic recently won the award for 'Best Generative AI & Agents' in Game Changers 2025, hosted by Lightspeed and partnered with VentureBeat, Nasdaq, and industry experts. As a multiplayer platform, Bitmagic enables players to share generated worlds and experiences, turning AI from a development tool into a play mechanic.

This democratisation effect shouldn't surprise anyone. Historically, technology disruptions empower nimble players willing to experiment. Indie studios often have flatter hierarchies, faster decision-making, and higher tolerance for creative risk.

The Cultural Reckoning

Beyond technology and policy lies something harder to quantify: culture. The 2023 SAG-AFTRA and Writers Guild of America strikes set a clear precedent. AI should serve as a tool supporting human talent, not replacing it. This isn't just union positioning. It reflects broader anxiety about what happens when algorithmic systems encroach on domains previously reserved for human expression.

Disney pioneered AI and machine learning across animation and VFX pipelines. Yet the company faces ongoing scrutiny about how these tools affect below-the-line workers. The global AI market in entertainment is projected to grow from $17.1 billion in 2023 to $195.7 billion by 2033. That explosive growth fuels concern about whether the benefits accrue to corporations or distribute across creative workforces.

The deeper cultural question centres on craft. Does AI-assisted creation diminish the value of human skill? Or does it liberate creatives from drudgery, allowing them to focus on higher-order decisions?

The answer likely depends on implementation. AI that replaces junior artists wholesale erodes the apprenticeship pathways that build expertise. AI that handles tedious production tasks whilst preserving mentorship and skill development can enhance rather than undermine craft.

Some disciplines inherently resist AI displacement. Choreographers and stand-up comedians work in art forms that cannot be physically separated from the human form. These fields contain an implicit “humanity requirement,” leading practitioners to view AI as a tool rather than replacement threat.

Other creative domains lack this inherent protection. Voice actors, illustrators, and writers face AI systems capable of mimicking their output with increasing fidelity. The May 2025 Copyright Office guidance acknowledging AI training practices likely don't qualify as fair use when they compete with human creators offers some protection, but legal frameworks lag technological capability.

Industry surveys reveal AI's impact is uneven. According to Google Cloud's 2025 research, 95% of developers say AI reduces repetitive tasks. Acceleration is particularly strong in playtesting and balancing (47%), localisation and translation (45%), and code generation and scripting support (44%). These gains improve quality of life for developers drowning in mechanical tasks.

However, challenges remain. Developers cite cost of AI integration (24%), need for upskilling staff (23%), and difficulty measuring AI implementation success (22%) as ongoing obstacles. Additionally, 54% of developers say they want to train or fine-tune their own models, suggesting an industry shift toward in-house AI expertise.

The Skills We Actually Need

If hybrid workflows are the future, what competencies matter? The answer splits between technical literacy and distinctly human capacities.

On the technical side, creatives need foundational AI literacy: understanding how models work, their limitations, biases, and appropriate use cases. Prompt engineering, despite scepticism, remains crucial as companies rely on large language models for user-facing features and core functionality. The Generative AI market is projected to reach over $355 billion by 2030, growing at 41.53% annually.

Data curation and pipeline management grow in importance. AI outputs depend entirely on input quality. Someone must identify, clean, curate, and prepare data. Someone must edit and refine AI outputs for market readiness.

But technical competencies alone aren't sufficient. The skills that resist automation, human-AI collaboration, creative problem-solving, emotional intelligence, and ethical reasoning, will become increasingly valuable. The future workplace will be characterised by adaptability, continuous learning, and a symbiotic relationship between humans and AI.

This suggests the hybrid future requires T-shaped professionals: deep expertise in a creative discipline plus broad literacy across AI capabilities, ethics, and collaborative workflows. Generalists who understand both creative vision and technological constraint become invaluable translators between human intent and machine execution.

Educational institutions are slowly adapting. Coursera offers courses teaching Prompt Engineering, ChatGPT, Prompt Patterns, LLM Application, Productivity, Creative Problem-Solving, Generative AI, AI Personalisation, and Innovation. These hybrid curricula acknowledge creativity and technical fluency must coexist.

The sector's future depends on adapting education to emphasise AI literacy, ethical reasoning, and collaborative human-AI innovation. Without this adaptation, the skills gap widens, leaving creatives ill-equipped to navigate hybrid workflows effectively. Fast-changing industry demands outpace traditional educational organisations, and economic development, creativity, and international competitiveness all depend on closing the skills gap.

What Speed Actually Costs

The seductive promise of AI is velocity. Concept art that once took two weeks to produce can now be created in under 48 hours. 3D models that required days of manual work can be generated and textured in hours.

But speed without intentionality produces generic output. The danger isn't that AI makes bad work. It's that AI makes acceptable work effortlessly, flooding markets with content that meets minimum viability thresholds without achieving excellence.

Over 20% of games released in 2025 on Steam report using generative-AI assets, up nearly 700% year-on-year. This explosion of AI-assisted production raises questions about homogenisation. When everyone uses similar tools trained on similar datasets, does output converge toward similarity?

The studios succeeding with hybrid workflows resist this convergence by treating AI as a starting point, not an endpoint. At King, AI generates level drafts. Humans determine whether those levels are fun, an assessment requiring taste, player psychology understanding, and creative intuition that no algorithm possesses.

At Ubisoft, Ghostwriter produces dialogue variations. Writers select, edit, and refine, imparting voice and personality. The AI handles volume. Humans handle soul.

The key question facing any studio adopting AI tools: does this accelerate our creative process, or does it outsource our creative judgment?

The Chasm Ahead

Standing at the edge of 2025, the gaming industry faces a critical transition point. Following the 2025 Game Developers Conference, industry leaders acknowledge that generative AI has reached a crucial adoption milestone, standing at the edge of the infamous “chasm” between early adopters and the early majority.

This metaphorical chasm represents the gap between innovative early adopters willing to experiment with emerging technology and the pragmatic early majority who need proven implementations and clear ROI before committing resources. Crossing this chasm requires more than impressive demos. It demands reliable infrastructure, sustainable economics, and proven governance frameworks.

According to a 2025 survey by Aream & Co., 84% of gaming executives are either using or testing AI tools, with 68% actively implementing AI in studios, particularly for content generation, game testing, and player engagement. Yet implementation doesn't equal success. Studios face organisational challenges alongside technical ones.

For developers looking to enhance workflows with AI tools, the key is starting with clear objectives and understanding which aspects of development would benefit most from AI assistance. By thoughtfully incorporating these technologies into existing processes and allowing time for teams to adapt and learn, studios can realise significant gains. Organisations can address challenges by creating structured rollout plans and prioritising staff training. Mitigating challenges often involves clear communication, adequate training, and thorough due diligence before investing in tools.

Staying competitive requires commitment to scalable infrastructure and responsible AI governance. Studios that adopt modular AI architectures, build robust data pipelines, and enforce transparent use policies will be better positioned to adapt as technology evolves.

The Path Nobody Planned

Standing in 2025, looking at hybrid workflows reshaping creative pipelines, the transformation feels simultaneously inevitable and surprising. Inevitable because computational tools always infiltrate creative disciplines eventually. Surprising because the implementation is messier, more collaborative, and more human-dependent than either utopian or dystopian predictions suggested.

We're not living in a future where AI autonomously generates games and films whilst humans become obsolete. We're also not in a world where AI remains a marginal curiosity with no real impact.

We're somewhere in between: hybrid creative organisms where human imagination sets direction, machine capability handles scale, and the boundary between them remains negotiable, contested, and evolving.

The studios thriving in this environment share common practices. They invest heavily in training, ensuring teams understand AI capabilities and limitations. They establish robust governance frameworks that balance innovation with risk management. They maintain clear ethical guidelines about authorship, compensation, and creative attribution.

Most critically, they preserve space for human judgment. AI can optimise. Only humans can determine what's worth optimising for.

The question isn't whether AI belongs in creative pipelines. That debate ended. The question is how we structure hybrid workflows to amplify human creativity rather than diminish it. How we build governance that protects both innovation and artists. How we train the next generation to wield these tools with skill and judgment.

There are no perfect answers yet. But the studios experimenting thoughtfully, failing productively, and iterating rapidly are writing the playbook in real-time.

The new creative engine runs on human imagination and machine capability in concert. The craft isn't disappearing. It's evolving. And that evolution, messy and uncertain as it is, might be the most interesting creative challenge we've faced in decades.

References & Sources

1. Google Cloud Press Center. (2025, August 18). “90% of Games Developers Already Using AI in Workflows, According to New Google Cloud Research.” https://www.googlecloudpresscorner.com/2025-08-18-90-of-Games-Developers-Already-Using-AI-in-Workflows,-According-to-New-Google-Cloud-Research

2. DigitalDefynd. (2025). “AI in Game Development: 5 Case Studies [2025].” https://digitaldefynd.com/IQ/ai-in-game-development-case-studies/

3. Futuramo. (2025). “AI Revolution in Creative Industries: Tools & Trends 2025.” https://futuramo.com/blog/how-ai-is-transforming-creative-work/

4. AlixPartners. “AI in Creative Industries: Enhancing, rather than replacing, human creativity in TV and film.” https://www.alixpartners.com/insights/102jsme/ai-in-creative-industries-enhancing-rather-than-replacing-human-creativity-in/

5. Odin Law and Media. “The Game Developer's Guide to AI Governance.” https://odinlaw.com/blog-ai-governance-in-game-development/

6. Bird & Bird. (2025). “Reshaping the Game: An EU-Focused Legal Guide to Generative and Agentic AI in Gaming.” https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2025/global/reshaping-the-game-an-eu-focused-legal-guide-to-generative-and-agentic-ai-in-gaming

7. Perkins Coie. “Human Authorship Requirement Continues To Pose Difficulties for AI-Generated Works.” https://perkinscoie.com/insights/article/human-authorship-requirement-continues-pose-difficulties-ai-generated-works

8. Harvard Law Review. (Vol. 138). “Artificial Intelligence and the Creative Double Bind.” https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-138/artificial-intelligence-and-the-creative-double-bind/

9. DLA Piper. (2025, February). “AI and authorship: Navigating copyright in the age of generative AI.” https://www.dlapiper.com/en-us/insights/publications/2025/02/ai-and-authorship-navigating-copyright-in-the-age-of-generative-ai

10. Ubisoft News. “The Convergence of AI and Creativity: Introducing Ghostwriter.” https://news.ubisoft.com/en-us/article/7Cm07zbBGy4Xml6WgYi25d/the-convergence-of-ai-and-creativity-introducing-ghostwriter

11. TechCrunch. (2023, March 22). “Ubisoft's new AI tool automatically generates dialogue for non-playable game characters.” https://techcrunch.com/2023/03/22/ubisofts-new-ai-tool-automatically-generates-dialogue-for-non-playable-game-characters/

12. Tech Xplore. (2025, May). “How AI helps push Candy Crush players through its most difficult puzzles.” https://techxplore.com/news/2025-05-ai-candy-players-difficult-puzzles.html

13. Neurohive. “AI Innovations in Candy Crush: King's Approach to Level Design.” https://neurohive.io/en/ai-apps/how-ai-helped-king-studio-develop-13-755-levels-for-candy-crush-saga/

14. Roblox Corporation. (2025, March). “Unveiling the Future of Creation With Native 3D Generation, Collaborative Studio Tools, and Economy Expansion.” https://corp.roblox.com/newsroom/2025/03/unveiling-future-creation-native-3d-generation-collaborative-studio-tools-economy-expansion

15. CompleteAI Training. (2025). “6 Recommended AI Courses for Game Developers in 2025.” https://completeaitraining.com/blog/6-recommended-ai-courses-for-game-developers-in-2025/

16. MIT xPRO. “Professional Certificate in Game Design.” https://executive-ed.xpro.mit.edu/professional-certificate-in-game-design

17. UCLA Extension. “Intro to AI: Reshaping the Future of Creative Design & Development Course.” https://www.uclaextension.edu/design-arts/uxgraphic-design/course/intro-ai-reshaping-future-creative-design-development-desma-x

18. Tandfonline. (2024). “AI and work in the creative industries: digital continuity or discontinuity?” https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17510694.2024.2421135

19. Brookings Institution. “Copyright alone cannot protect the future of creative work.” https://www.brookings.edu/articles/copyright-alone-cannot-protect-the-future-of-creative-work/

20. The Conversation. “Protecting artists' rights: what responsible AI means for the creative industries.” https://theconversation.com/protecting-artists-rights-what-responsible-ai-means-for-the-creative-industries-250842

21. VKTR. (2025). “AI Copyright Law 2025: Latest US & Global Policy Moves.” https://www.vktr.com/ai-ethics-law-risk/ai-copyright-law/

22. Inworld AI. (2025). “GDC 2025: Beyond prototypes to production AI-overcoming critical barriers to scale.” https://inworld.ai/blog/gdc-2025

23. Thrumos. (2025). “AI Prompt Engineer Career Guide 2025: Skills, Salary & Path.” https://www.thrumos.com/insights/ai-prompt-engineer-career-guide-2025

24. Coursera. “Best Game Development Courses & Certificates [2026].” https://www.coursera.org/courses?query=game+development

25. a16z Games. (2024). Survey on AI adoption in game studios.

26. Game Developers Conference. (2024). Roblox presentation on AI tools for avatar setup and object texturing.

27. Lenny's Newsletter. “AI prompt engineering in 2025: What works and what doesn't.” https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/ai-prompt-engineering-in-2025-sander-schulhoff

28. Foley & Lardner LLP. (2025, February). “Clarifying the Copyrightability of AI-Assisted Works.” https://www.foley.com/insights/publications/2025/02/clarifying-copyrightability-ai-assisted-works/

29. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. (2025, March). “Appellate Court Affirms Human Authorship Requirement for Copyrighting AI-Generated Works.” https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2025/03/appellate-court-affirms-human-authorship

30. Game World Observer. (2023, March 22). “Ubisoft introduces Ghostwriter, AI narrative tool to help game writers create lines for NPCs.” https://gameworldobserver.com/2023/03/22/ubisoft-ghostwriter-ai-tool-npc-dialogues

---

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

In Summary: * With her washing machine fixed, the wife has been generally happier today than she's been for awhile. And with good college basketball for me to follow all day, I've been well entertained and generally happy all day, too.

Prayers, etc.: My daily prayers

Health Metrics: * bw= 222.67 lbs * bp= 146/87 (64)

Exercise: * kegel pelvic floor exercise, half squats, calf raises, wall push-ups

Diet: * 06:15 – 2+ cookies, 1 banana * 09:15 – egg rolls * 13:15 – short ribs, boiled eggs, white rice * 15:30 – 1 cheese & seafood salad sandwich

Activities, Chores, etc.: * 05:30 – read, pray, follow news reports from various sources, surf the socials * 08:30 – bank accounts activity monitored * 11:25 – tuned in to The Flagship Station for IU Sports ahead of this afternoon's NCAA men's basketball game between the Chicago State Cougers and the Indiana Hoosiers. * 13:52 – ... and the Hoosiers win 78 to 58. * 14:30 – listening to the Ohio State Sports Network ahead of the afternoon Buckeyes men's basketball game in the CBS Sports Classic vs. the North Carolina State Tar Heels. * 16:35 – ... and the Tar Heels win 71 to 70. * 17:00 – listening to Purdue Men's Basketball Radio ahead of tonight's game at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in the Indy Classic, Auburn Tigers vs Purdue Boilermakers. * 19:25 – ... and Purdue wins 88 to 60. * 19:30 – time now to turn off the radio, wrap up the night prayers, listen to relaxing music, and quietly read until bedtime.

Chess: * 15:15 – moved in all pending CC games

It's 5 days before Christmas, and something changed today. My mum was in the kitchen creating butter from cream. She was so excited, so happy as she saw the butter start to separate from the cream I could hear the Joy in her voice, but then a sudden shift as she witnessed it looked like something had gone wrong. It looked like it had started to mix back in again but she paused and waited just a little longer, and it all started to separate again. She realised that it had worked. I heard something when she spoke, deeper than cream and butter “I thought it had all gone wrong, but it all came together in the end”. When I heard this, it was God teaching me again through my mother and her words. It felt like God had just whispered, just when you think it's all gone wrong, it always comes together. You see, yesterday I didn't know if I was going to be able to make Christmas this year with presents. Just yesterday, I let the grief flow through me as I typed about the pain of possibly letting her down. Something shifted today, though, in that sentence, in that moment, something softened. I decided to let go and just be honest, be honest with the people I love and see if they could help me. I don't like asking for help. I've always felt like I'm always the one needing help somehow, that I can't just get things together myself, but I needed help, and maybe just maybe that was the very thing God was getting me to do. Open your arms and just speak. So I opened my arms, and I spoke. I spoke my truth and asked for help, and guess what, I got help from those I love, and in that moment, I've never felt so loved. Just yesterday, I was in so much pain, and today I felt the opposite. I felt the closeness of the people around me who always want to support me. Sure, they're not perfect, and I've struggled with them not being perfect because I often am somehow trying to be perfect. Today I saw and felt something new, though, a little crack of my heart opened back up wide, all because I asked for help. I think we get embarrassed and want to hide when we have to be honest and say I don't have it all together, but I'm really trying. I really am trying to do better and work on getting things together so I don't have to put any of my pressure on anybody else. Maybe it's not pressure for them, though maybe just maybe the joy it brought you, it also brought them too. I remember before this holding my pride so tight and close to me because I thought if I had asked for help, then maybe that meant I had failed, but I'm realising it was more of a success because I got to open my heart again to receiving help and support, which I don't often do. So if you're still here and are reading this... remember it's okay to ask for help, we are all here just trying to figure this thing out we call life. In order to receive, we must open our arms wide and speak.

Thoughts. I feel like I can breathe again. Just a woman trying to do better.

I thought the task for this day would be easier. But using a username for sign-in is quite challenging to implement with Supabase. :/

Now I have a new table for profiles, besides the auth table Supabase provides. Because Supabase Auth can't handle sign-in with a username, I now also have an edge function running. Which I never used before. It works, so I don't complain. :)

Maybe this is something you normally don't need for an MVP, but I was tired of typing an email for the sign-in. So, for me, it needs to be in the MVP.

When I was done, I staged my changes, and I noticed that I accidentally committed my .env file. So I used git-filter-repo to remove the env file from git history. What I did not know was it removed all my staged changes without a warning. 😱 That was a shock. A big one. After some minutes walking through the house, I calmed down and sat back on the chair. I was able to rescue around 85% of the files. The rest I could reproduce somehow.

WHAT an evening! I'm back on track and happy the accident was not that bad.

👋

---

78 of #100DaysToOffload
#log #AdventOfProgress
Thoughts?

There are chapters in Scripture that feel like a door gently closing, not with finality, but with seriousness. Second Corinthians 13 is one of those chapters. It does not raise its voice. It does not perform miracles. It does not tell a story that children memorize in Sunday school. Instead, it leans forward, looks the believer directly in the eyes, and asks a question that cannot be avoided forever: Is Christ actually living in you, or are you still living off proximity, reputation, and borrowed faith?

This chapter is Paul’s final words to the Corinthian church, and he does not waste them. By the time we reach this point in the letter, the tone has shifted away from defense and explanation and into something more surgical. Paul is no longer clarifying his apostleship. He is no longer explaining suffering. He is no longer persuading through story or emotion. He is confronting maturity itself. He is doing what every good spiritual father eventually must do: stepping back and forcing the believer to stand on their own feet.

Second Corinthians 13 is not about correction alone. It is about examination. Not inspection by leaders. Not judgment by the church. Not comparison with others. It is self-examination before God. And that makes it one of the most uncomfortable chapters in the New Testament, because it removes all the usual hiding places. There is no crowd to disappear into. No argument to win. No theology to debate. Paul asks each believer to look inward and answer honestly whether the life of Christ is actually operative within them.

What makes this chapter so piercing is that it is written to people who already consider themselves believers. This is not an evangelistic letter. This is not written to skeptics or outsiders. This is written to church people. People who know the language. People who know the routines. People who have spiritual experiences on record. And Paul still says, in essence, prove yourselves.

That single phrase alone unsettles modern Christianity more than we realize. We are accustomed to being told who we are based on affiliation, confession, or memory. Paul does not deny grace. He does not deny salvation. But he does insist that grace leaves evidence, that salvation produces fruit, and that faith, if genuine, withstands examination. Not perfection, but presence. Not flawlessness, but life.

Paul begins the chapter by reminding the Corinthians that this will be his third visit to them, invoking the Old Testament principle that truth is established by two or three witnesses. This is not a legal threat. It is a spiritual warning. Paul is saying, I am not coming again to negotiate reality. He has written. He has warned. He has pleaded. Now he is coming to see what is real.

There is something deeply relevant about that for believers today. We live in a culture that endlessly negotiates truth. We explain away conviction. We rename sin. We spiritualize avoidance. Paul refuses to do that. He makes it clear that love does not always sound soft, and correction does not always come wrapped in reassurance. Sometimes love arrives with clarity, and clarity can feel sharp when we have grown accustomed to blur.

Paul also addresses an accusation that had been circulating among the Corinthians, that he was weak, unimpressive, or lacking authority. Instead of defending himself again, Paul reframes the entire issue. He points them not to his strength, but to Christ’s pattern. Christ was crucified in weakness, yet lives by the power of God. Paul aligns himself with that same pattern. Weakness is not disqualification. Power is not always loud. Authority is not measured by dominance but by faithfulness.

This matters because many believers equate spiritual health with visible success. Loud faith. Confident speech. Platform presence. Paul dismantles that assumption. He reminds the church that Christ’s greatest victory looked like defeat from the outside. That truth alone reshapes how we understand spiritual maturity. If Christ could be crucified in apparent weakness and still be victorious, then perhaps our own seasons of obscurity, suffering, or limitation are not evidence of failure but alignment.

Then Paul turns the lens fully onto the Corinthians themselves, and this is where the chapter reaches its emotional center. He tells them to examine themselves to see whether they are in the faith. He tells them to test themselves. Not to test Paul. Not to test doctrine. Not to test leadership. To test themselves.

This is not a call to anxiety or self-condemnation. It is a call to honesty. Paul is not asking whether they remember a moment of belief. He is asking whether Christ is presently active in them. Whether His character is forming. Whether His life is shaping their responses. Whether His Spirit is producing transformation. Faith, in Paul’s understanding, is not a static possession. It is a living reality.

That distinction is everything. Many people confuse the memory of conversion with the experience of communion. They look back instead of inward. They point to a past decision instead of a present relationship. Paul does not deny the importance of beginnings, but he insists that true faith continues. It grows. It resists sin. It softens the heart. It disciplines the will. It produces love, not perfection, but direction.

Paul even says something that feels shocking to modern ears: unless, of course, you fail the test. He allows for the possibility that some who consider themselves believers may discover that Christ is not truly living in them. This is not cruelty. This is mercy. A false assurance is far more dangerous than an honest reckoning. Paul would rather disturb comfort now than allow deception to persist.

There is something profoundly loving about that, even though it does not feel gentle. Paul wants a church built on reality, not illusion. He wants believers who know Christ, not just speak about Him. He wants faith that holds up under pressure, not faith that collapses the moment it is challenged.

He also clarifies that his concern is not about proving himself right, but about seeing the Corinthians do what is right, even if it makes him appear weak. That sentence alone reveals the heart of true spiritual leadership. Paul is willing to lose reputation if it means the church gains integrity. He is willing to appear unsuccessful if it means Christ is truly formed in them.

This is the opposite of performative religion. It is the opposite of brand-building spirituality. Paul does not need their admiration. He wants their transformation. He does not need to win an argument. He wants to see obedience. That posture is increasingly rare, and desperately needed.

Paul even prays that they will do no wrong, not so that he can be proven right, but so that they may do what is right, even if he seems to fail. His concern is not optics. It is holiness. Not moralism, but alignment with truth. This is the kind of leadership that refuses to manipulate outcomes for personal validation.

He reminds them that they can do nothing against the truth, only for the truth. That sentence cuts through modern relativism like a blade. Truth is not flexible. It does not adjust itself to comfort. It stands, regardless of whether it benefits us. Paul aligns himself fully with truth, even when truth costs him.

He also speaks openly about rejoicing when he is weak and they are strong. This is not self-loathing. It is spiritual clarity. Paul understands that the goal of leadership is not dependence, but growth. A healthy church does not need constant correction. A mature believer does not need constant supervision. Paul is aiming for strength in them, not centrality for himself.

As the chapter begins to close, Paul explains that everything he has written is for their strengthening, not their destruction. Even his harsh words are aimed at building them up. Correction is not cruelty. Discipline is not rejection. Examination is not condemnation. When done in love, all of these are tools of formation.

This is where Second Corinthians 13 quietly challenges modern Christianity at its foundation. We often interpret discomfort as harm. We interpret conviction as judgment. We interpret challenge as unloving. Paul shows us a different model. Love tells the truth. Love refuses to lie for the sake of peace. Love prioritizes formation over feelings.

As he prepares to end the letter, Paul urges the church to rejoice, to aim for restoration, to comfort one another, to agree with one another, and to live in peace. This is not a contradiction to his firmness. It is its fruit. Truth leads to peace when it is received. Restoration follows honesty. Unity grows from shared submission to Christ, not from avoiding hard conversations.

The God of love and peace, Paul says, will be with them. That promise is not attached to denial, but to obedience. Not to avoidance, but to alignment. God’s presence accompanies those who walk in truth, even when truth is uncomfortable.

Second Corinthians 13 does not end with fireworks. It ends with a blessing. Grace, love, and fellowship. Not as abstract ideas, but as lived realities. Grace from Christ. Love from the Father. Fellowship from the Spirit. This is the life Paul wants for the church, not surface religion, but shared participation in the life of God.

This chapter does not ask whether you attend church. It asks whether Christ lives in you. It does not ask whether you can explain doctrine. It asks whether your life reflects His presence. It does not ask whether you once believed. It asks whether you are presently walking in faith.

And that question does not fade with time. It grows more important the longer we walk. Because borrowed faith eventually runs out. Proximity fades. Reputation crumbles. What remains is reality.

Second Corinthians 13 leaves us with a mirror, not a measuring stick against others. It invites us to stop performing and start examining. Not to fear, but to be honest. Not to despair, but to mature.

In the end, Paul is not trying to make the church smaller. He is trying to make it real.

Now we will explore how this final chapter speaks directly into modern church culture, spiritual burnout, performative faith, and what it truly means to live examined but unashamed.

When we move from the ancient streets of Corinth into the modern church, Second Corinthians 13 does not lose relevance. It gains it. The questions Paul asks become sharper in a culture where faith is often curated, packaged, and performed. We live in an age where belief is visible everywhere, but depth is harder to find. Crosses are worn. Scriptures are quoted. Christian language fills bios and captions. And yet Paul’s question still presses forward without apology: is Christ actually living in you?

This chapter exposes something subtle but dangerous that can take root in any long-term believer’s life: spiritual substitution. The slow replacement of lived communion with borrowed language. The gradual shift from inward transformation to outward association. Faith becomes something we reference instead of something we inhabit. Paul will not allow that to remain unchallenged.

When he tells the Corinthians to examine themselves, he is not asking them to audit their behavior for flaws. He is asking them to examine their source of life. Who is animating them? What governs their decisions when no one is watching? Where does conviction come from? Where does comfort come from? Where does authority come from?

Modern believers are often very good at spiritual imitation. We learn the tone. The phrases. The posture. We know how to sound humble without being honest. We know how to appear devoted without being surrendered. Paul is not impressed by imitation. He is concerned with incarnation. Christ in you, not Christ referenced by you.

That phrase alone dismantles an entire culture of performative faith. Because performance can be maintained without presence. But incarnation cannot. If Christ lives in you, something changes. Your conscience sharpens. Your pride is challenged. Your loyalties reorder. Your patience stretches. Your love deepens. Not perfectly, but genuinely.

Paul is not offering a new standard. He is returning to the original one. Christianity was never meant to be inherited as a cultural identity. It was meant to be received as a living reality. The danger Paul sees in Corinth is not rebellion, but substitution. Not open rejection of Christ, but quiet displacement of Him.

This is why Paul speaks so plainly about failing the test. That language unsettles us because we prefer assurance without inspection. We want certainty without vulnerability. But Paul understands that untested faith is fragile faith. It may survive routine, but it will not survive pressure.

Pressure reveals what performance hides. Trials strip away borrowed strength. Suffering exposes whether faith is rooted or rehearsed. Paul has suffered deeply, and he knows this. He knows that when life presses in, only what is real remains.

This is especially important in a time when many believers feel spiritually exhausted. Burnout has become common language in the church. People are tired of activity without intimacy. Tired of obligation without encounter. Tired of appearing strong while feeling hollow. Second Corinthians 13 does not shame that fatigue. It explains it.

A faith that is lived outwardly but not inwardly will exhaust the soul. A Christianity built on performance requires constant energy. A Christianity rooted in presence sustains. Paul is calling the Corinthians back to the source. Not more effort, but deeper honesty. Not louder faith, but truer faith.

Paul’s willingness to appear weak so that the church can be strong also speaks directly into modern leadership culture. We live in a time that rewards visibility, control, and image management. Paul offers a different vision. Leadership that prioritizes growth over influence. Integrity over applause. Truth over comfort.

He does not want the Corinthians dependent on him. He wants them grounded in Christ. That distinction is crucial. Any system that relies on perpetual dependence has failed spiritually. Paul measures success by maturity, not loyalty. By fruit, not followership.

This challenges how we evaluate churches, ministries, and even personal faith. Are we growing more dependent on Christ, or more dependent on structure? Are we becoming more discerning, or more passive? Are we being strengthened, or simply managed?

Paul’s words about doing nothing against the truth also confront the modern tendency to bend truth for outcomes. We justify small compromises for perceived greater good. Paul refuses this logic. Truth is not a tool. It is a foundation. When truth is compromised, everything built upon it eventually cracks.

This is why Paul insists that everything he has written is for building up, not tearing down. True building requires solid material. You cannot build with denial. You cannot build with avoidance. You cannot build with illusion. You build with truth, even when it costs.

As the chapter moves toward its closing exhortations, Paul’s call to restoration becomes clearer. Restoration is not regression. It is alignment. It is the re-centering of faith around Christ Himself. Not around leaders. Not around experiences. Not around identity markers. Around Christ living within.

Paul urges the church to comfort one another, agree with one another, and live in peace. This is not forced unity. It is shared submission. Agreement flows from common allegiance. Peace flows from honesty. Comfort flows from truth received in love.

This is the kind of church Paul envisions. Not perfect. Not impressive. But real. A community where examination is normal, not threatening. Where growth is expected. Where weakness is not hidden but redeemed. Where Christ’s life is visible not through spectacle, but through transformed lives.

The final blessing of Second Corinthians is not poetic filler. It is theological summary. Grace from Christ, love from the Father, fellowship from the Spirit. This is not abstract theology. It is lived experience. Grace that sustains. Love that anchors. Fellowship that connects.

Grace addresses our failure. Love addresses our identity. Fellowship addresses our isolation. Together, they form the life of a believer who is no longer borrowing faith, but living it.

Second Corinthians 13 leaves us with no dramatic ending, because maturity rarely looks dramatic. It looks steady. It looks honest. It looks grounded. It looks like a believer who no longer needs constant reassurance, because Christ is present.

This chapter does not accuse. It invites. It invites believers to stop outsourcing their faith and start inhabiting it. To stop hiding behind proximity and start living from presence. To stop performing belief and start walking in it.

The question Paul leaves with the church is not meant to produce fear. It is meant to produce clarity. Is Christ in you? Not as a slogan. Not as a memory. Not as an association. But as a living, shaping reality.

Because when Christ truly lives in you, faith is no longer borrowed. It is embodied. And when faith is embodied, it endures.

That is the quiet power of Second Corinthians 13. It does not shout. It does not entertain. It simply tells the truth and trusts that truth to do its work.

And for those willing to examine themselves honestly, that truth does not destroy. It strengthens.

Watch Douglas Vandergraph’s inspiring faith-based videos on YouTube

Support the ministry by buying Douglas a coffee

Your friend, Douglas Vandergraph

#Faith #BibleStudy #NewTestament #2Corinthians #ChristianGrowth #SpiritualMaturity #ChristianLiving #FaithJourney

I want to begin this the same way most of us actually experience life, not with triumph but with tension. Second Corinthians chapter twelve does not open with fireworks or certainty. It opens with a man who has seen things he cannot explain, experienced heights he cannot fully describe, and yet finds himself living with something that will not go away. That alone should already change how we read this chapter. Too often we treat Scripture as if it exists to eliminate struggle, when in reality it exists to reframe it. Paul is not writing as a man who has escaped weakness. He is writing as a man who has learned how to live inside it without losing his soul.

This chapter is uncomfortable for people who want faith to function like a spiritual ladder. If I pray enough, believe hard enough, live clean enough, then surely God will remove the thing that hurts, the thing that limits me, the thing that embarrasses me. But Paul disrupts that entire framework. He talks about visions and revelations, about being caught up into paradise, about experiences so sacred he refuses to put language around them. And yet, in the same breath, he talks about a thorn in his flesh that remains. The contrast is intentional. Heaven did not cancel out hardship. Revelation did not remove resistance. Spiritual maturity did not grant immunity.

That should matter to you, especially if you are tired of feeling like something is wrong with your faith because something is still wrong with your life.

Paul makes a point of distancing himself from spiritual bragging. He speaks in the third person when referencing his visions, almost as if he is deliberately refusing to center his identity around the most extraordinary moments of his life. That alone is a lesson most people never learn. We tend to define ourselves by our peaks. Paul defines himself by his obedience. He knows that encounters with God are not badges to be displayed but responsibilities to be stewarded. And stewardship often looks far less impressive than revelation.

Then comes the line that shifts everything. He tells us that a thorn was given to him, a messenger of Satan, to torment him. This is one of the most misunderstood lines in all of Paul’s letters, because people rush past the word “given.” They want to assign blame immediately. Was it Satan? Was it God? Was it circumstance? Paul doesn’t play that game. He acknowledges the source of the torment without missing the sovereignty of God. Somehow, in a way that stretches our theology, the thing that torments him is also the thing that protects him from pride.

That should stop us in our tracks.

We usually assume the worst things in our lives exist to destroy us. Paul suggests some of them exist to keep us grounded. The thorn is not described in detail, and I believe that omission is intentional. If Paul had named it, we would have categorized it. Physical illness? Emotional distress? Opposition? Trauma? Instead, the thorn remains undefined so that every reader can recognize their own. Whatever keeps you humble, dependent, and aware of your limits may be closer to this text than you think.

Paul does what any of us would do. He prays for it to be removed. Not once, not twice, but three times. This is not casual prayer. This is persistent, intentional pleading. He is not rebuked for asking. God does not shame him for wanting relief. The prayers themselves are not the problem. The answer is what challenges us.

“My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”

That sentence is not comforting until you’ve reached the end of your strength. Before that point, it sounds like a spiritual consolation prize. After that point, it becomes oxygen. God does not say, “I will fix this.” He says, “I will meet you here.” And for many of us, that is harder to accept than silence.

We want power that removes weakness. God offers power that works through it. That distinction changes everything. If power is only available after weakness disappears, then weakness is the enemy. But if power is perfected in weakness, then weakness becomes the doorway. That does not mean weakness is good. It means it is not wasted.

Paul’s response is shocking. Instead of resentment, he chooses reorientation. He says he will boast all the more gladly about his weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on him. This is not self-hatred. This is not performative humility. This is clarity. Paul understands that the presence of weakness does not signal the absence of God. In his case, it proves the nearness of God’s sustaining grace.

This chapter dismantles the idea that strength is about control. True strength, according to Paul, is about surrender. Not passive resignation, but active trust. He does not stop working. He does not withdraw from ministry. He does not lower his calling. He simply stops pretending that he is the source of the power behind it.

That is a word for anyone who feels like they are holding everything together with sheer willpower. You were never meant to be the engine. You were meant to be the vessel.

Paul goes further. He says he delights in weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and difficulties for Christ’s sake. That sentence has been abused by people who glorify suffering or tell others to endure abuse in silence. That is not what Paul is doing. He is not praising pain. He is acknowledging purpose. He is recognizing that every place where he cannot rely on himself becomes a place where Christ shows up with undeniable strength.

“When I am weak, then I am strong.”

That line is not poetic irony. It is lived theology. It is the confession of someone who has reached the limits of self-sufficiency and discovered that God does His best work there. Strength that depends on you will always run out. Strength that flows through you has a different source.

Paul then turns his attention back to the Corinthians themselves. He reminds them that he has been foolish in boasting, but only because they forced him into it. This is not ego. This is pastoral frustration. They have been measuring apostles by charisma, by presence, by performance, while missing the heart of the gospel. Paul refuses to compete on those terms. He reminds them that true authority is revealed through sacrifice, not spectacle.

He points out that he has never been a burden to them. He did not exploit them financially. He did not manipulate them emotionally. He did not build his ministry on what he could extract. That alone is worth sitting with, especially in a time when spiritual leadership is often entangled with platforms, branding, and influence. Paul’s concern is not how impressive he appears but whether Christ is faithfully represented.

He speaks like a spiritual parent, not a celebrity. He is not interested in being admired. He wants them built up. That phrase matters. Built up, not impressed. Strengthened, not entertained. Maturity, not dependency.

Second Corinthians twelve is not a chapter about heroic faith. It is a chapter about honest faith. Faith that admits limits. Faith that prays boldly and listens humbly. Faith that keeps going even when the thorn remains. Faith that learns how to rest in grace instead of striving for control.

If you are in a season where something has not been removed despite your prayers, this chapter is not telling you that God is absent. It is telling you that God may be closer than you realize, working not by eliminating weakness but by filling it with His presence.

In the next part, we will step even deeper into what it means to live with a thorn without letting it define you, how grace reshapes identity, and why this chapter may be one of the most freeing texts for people who feel worn down, underestimated, or quietly exhausted in their faith.

What makes Second Corinthians chapter twelve so quietly radical is that it refuses to give us a clean ending. There is no moment where the thorn disappears. There is no testimony section where Paul announces a breakthrough after enough faith was applied. Instead, the chapter invites us into a sustained way of living, one that most people are never taught how to do. It teaches us how to carry something unresolved without becoming bitter, smaller, or spiritually numb.

That matters because unresolved pain is where many believers slowly lose heart. Not because they stop believing in God, but because they stop believing God is attentive to the parts of their lives that did not turn out the way they hoped. Paul’s honesty confronts that quiet erosion of trust. He does not pretend the thorn is insignificant. He also does not let it become his identity. That balance is rare, and it is learned, not instinctive.

Grace, in this chapter, is not framed as forgiveness alone. It is framed as sufficiency. That word deserves to be sat with longer than we usually allow. Sufficient does not mean minimal. It does not mean barely enough. It means fully adequate for the task at hand. God is not saying, “I will give you just enough grace to survive.” He is saying, “I will give you enough grace to live faithfully, fruitfully, and meaningfully, even here.”

That redefines what many people expect from God. We often measure God’s goodness by how quickly He resolves discomfort. Paul measures God’s goodness by how faithfully He sustains obedience. Those are two very different metrics.

Paul’s thorn keeps him dependent, but it does not keep him passive. That distinction is crucial. Dependence on God is not the same thing as resignation. Paul continues to preach, to travel, to plant churches, to endure persecution, to write letters that would shape Christianity for generations. The thorn does not slow the mission. It deepens it. It strips away any illusion that Paul is operating on his own strength and makes it impossible to confuse the power of the gospel with the personality of the messenger.

There is something profoundly freeing about that if you let it sink in. Your limitations do not disqualify you from meaningful work. They may actually protect the integrity of it. When you cannot rely on charisma, stamina, or certainty, you learn to rely on God’s presence in a way that keeps your ego in check and your heart open.

Paul’s willingness to boast in weakness is not about drawing attention to himself. It is about redirecting attention away from himself. Weakness becomes a lens through which Christ’s strength is more clearly seen. In a culture that rewards confidence and polish, that kind of perspective feels almost subversive. But it is deeply aligned with the heart of the gospel.

Jesus Himself did not save the world through displays of invincibility. He saved it through surrender. Through vulnerability. Through obedience that looked like failure before it looked like victory. Paul is not inventing a new theology here. He is living out the pattern he learned from Christ.

That is why this chapter speaks so powerfully to people who feel overlooked, underestimated, or quietly worn down. If you have been carrying something that makes you feel less impressive, less effective, or less confident, Paul’s words tell you that you are not operating outside of God’s plan. You may be closer to the center of it than you realize.

Paul also addresses something else that is easy to miss. He acknowledges that unchecked spiritual experiences can lead to pride. That admission alone is startling. We often assume that spiritual highs automatically produce humility. Paul knows better. Encounters with God, if not grounded in dependence, can inflate the ego just as easily as success can. The thorn acts as a counterbalance, a reminder that spiritual authority is not self-generated.

This is especially relevant in a time when spiritual platforms can grow faster than character. Paul’s life stands as a warning and an invitation. Revelation without humility is dangerous. Influence without dependence is fragile. The thorn, as painful as it is, becomes a safeguard.

Toward the end of the chapter, Paul’s tone shifts again. He expresses concern that when he comes to Corinth, he may find division, conflict, and immaturity. This is not the complaint of a tired leader looking for affirmation. It is the concern of someone who understands that unresolved issues, when ignored, do not stay neutral. They grow. Paul is not interested in pretending everything is fine. He believes grace should lead to growth, not complacency.

And yet, even here, his posture is pastoral, not punitive. His desire is not to assert dominance but to see restoration. That matters, because it shows us how someone who understands weakness treats others. Paul does not weaponize his authority. He uses it to build up, not tear down. That is what grace does when it has done its work in a person.

Second Corinthians twelve leaves us with a question that is uncomfortable but necessary. What if the thing you keep asking God to remove is the very place where His strength is most visible in your life? What if the absence of resolution is not abandonment, but invitation?

That does not mean you stop praying. Paul did not. It does not mean you stop hoping for change. It means you stop measuring God’s faithfulness by one outcome. You begin to look for His presence in the endurance, the growth, the quiet strength that shows up day after day when quitting would be easier.

This chapter teaches us that weakness is not the opposite of faith. Self-reliance is. Faith looks like showing up again, leaning into grace again, trusting that God is at work even when the story does not follow the script you expected.

If you are tired, if you feel like you should be stronger by now, if you are frustrated that something has not changed despite sincere prayer, this chapter does not shame you. It speaks to you. It reminds you that grace is not a consolation prize for those who could not get it together. It is the sustaining power of God for people who know they cannot do this alone.

Paul did not become less effective because of his thorn. He became more honest. More grounded. More reliant. And through that reliance, the gospel went further than it ever could have through human strength alone.

That is the quiet hope of Second Corinthians twelve. You are not failing because you are weak. You are being invited to discover a strength that does not originate in you, and therefore will not run out when you do.

Your friend, Douglas Vandergraph

Watch Douglas Vandergraph’s inspiring faith-based videos on YouTube

Support the ministry by buying Douglas a coffee

Most men never consciously decide to live beneath their capacity. They don’t wake up one morning and announce that they’re done growing, done stretching, done becoming. What happens instead is quieter, slower, almost polite. Life applies pressure. Disappointment accumulates. Responsibilities pile up. Dreams get delayed. And somewhere in the middle of all of that, a man makes an unspoken agreement with himself. He decides this is enough. Not because it truly is, but because believing there is more feels dangerous after you’ve been disappointed enough times. This is how potential goes dormant. Not killed, not destroyed, just buried under realism, fatigue, and learned restraint.

There isn’t a man alive today who isn’t capable of doing more than he is currently doing. That statement isn’t rooted in arrogance or hustle culture. It’s rooted in theology. Scripture consistently reveals a God who places more inside people than they initially believe they can carry. God does not create excess. He does not overbuild souls. If there is unused capacity within a man, it exists because it was meant to be drawn upon at some point. Capacity is not an accident. It is evidence of assignment.

The tension many men feel in their lives is not random dissatisfaction. It is not ingratitude. It is not a personality flaw. It is the friction between who they are living as and who they were created to become. When a man lives aligned with his calling, even exhaustion feels meaningful. When he lives beneath it, even rest feels hollow. This is why so many men feel tired despite not doing anything particularly demanding. Their spirit is underutilized. Their soul knows it was built for more weight than it is currently carrying.

The modern world praises comfort while quietly draining men of purpose. It offers endless distraction in exchange for stillness. It rewards compliance over courage. It trains men to manage life instead of lead it. Over time, this environment reshapes expectations. A man starts measuring success by survival instead of obedience. He shifts from asking what God is calling him to do to asking what he can reasonably maintain. That shift feels subtle, but it changes everything. Faith shrinks when it is constantly filtered through convenience.

Scripture never presents calling as something that arrives when conditions are ideal. God does not wait for men to feel fully ready, emotionally stable, or financially secure before He calls them forward. In fact, the opposite pattern appears again and again. God calls people precisely when their limitations are obvious. Moses is called with a speech problem and a criminal past. Gideon is called while hiding and self-identifying as weak. David is called while overlooked and underestimated. Peter is called while impulsive and inconsistent. The common thread is not readiness. It is availability.

Many men today are waiting to become someone else before they obey. They believe confidence must precede action. They believe clarity must precede obedience. They believe certainty must precede commitment. Scripture teaches the opposite. Obedience produces clarity. Action builds confidence. Commitment invites provision. Faith is not the result of seeing the full picture. Faith is the willingness to move while the picture is still incomplete.

One of the most dangerous lies men believe is that settling is maturity. They mistake restraint for wisdom and caution for discernment. They say they have learned their limits, when in reality they have only learned their fears. True maturity does not shrink a man’s obedience. It refines it. It does not lower the call. It deepens the trust required to answer it. A man who has truly grown in faith does not dream smaller. He trusts deeper.

The cost of unfulfilled potential is not loud failure. It is quiet regret. It shows up years later in questions that have no easy answers. What if I had tried again? What if I had trusted God instead of my fear? What if I had said yes when it mattered? Regret is rarely about what a man did wrong. It is usually about what he never did at all. The things he talked himself out of. The steps he delayed until momentum faded. The calling he postponed until it felt safer, and then never returned to.

God’s design for men was never passive existence. From the beginning, man was created to cultivate, protect, and steward. He was placed in responsibility before he was placed in comfort. The fall did not remove that calling. It distorted it. Sin introduced fear, shame, and self-doubt into a role that was originally fueled by trust and communion with God. Redemption does not eliminate responsibility. It restores it. In Christ, men are not called to less. They are called to more, but with grace rather than striving as the source.

Many men confuse more effort with more obedience. God is not asking men to burn themselves out trying to earn worth. He is asking them to bring their full selves into alignment with His will. There is a difference between grinding and surrendering. Grinding is powered by insecurity. Surrender is powered by trust. When a man surrenders, he often finds that the weight he feared was never as heavy as the resistance he carried while avoiding it.

Fear plays a central role in keeping men beneath their capacity, but fear is rarely obvious. It often disguises itself as logic. It whispers about timing, resources, optics, and risk. It frames itself as prudence. But fear always has the same outcome: delay. Faith produces movement. Fear produces postponement. And postponement, over time, becomes disobedience by default.

The Bible does not treat fear as a moral failure. It treats it as a decision point. Fear appears whenever obedience threatens comfort. God’s consistent response is not condemnation but invitation. Do not be afraid. Go anyway. Trust Me. Those words are not commands to feel differently. They are invitations to act despite what you feel. Courage is not the absence of fear. It is obedience in its presence.

A man’s life expands to the degree that he trusts God with outcomes he cannot control. Control is often mistaken for responsibility, but they are not the same. Responsibility responds to God’s direction. Control resists it. Many men cling to control because they have been disappointed before. They believe controlling outcomes will protect them from pain. In reality, it often protects them from purpose.

There is a reason Scripture emphasizes faith as action rather than belief alone. Belief without obedience is intellectual agreement, not trust. Trust moves. Trust risks. Trust steps forward while acknowledging uncertainty. This is why James writes that faith without works is dead. Not because works save, but because living faith expresses itself through movement. A faith that never changes behavior is a faith that has not fully taken root.

Men often underestimate how much their example matters. They believe their private compromises and quiet withdrawals affect only themselves. Scripture suggests otherwise. Men were designed to be anchors, not because they dominate, but because they stabilize. When a man steps into obedience, it creates permission for others to do the same. When he shrinks back, it quietly normalizes fear. Leadership is not always visible. Influence often happens long before anyone notices.

The world does not need louder men or more aggressive men. It needs surrendered men. Men whose strength is anchored in obedience rather than ego. Men who are willing to be misunderstood in order to be faithful. Men who pray when no one is watching and act when obedience costs them comfort. These men shape families, communities, and cultures not through force, but through faithfulness.

Potential unused does not disappear. It turns inward. It becomes frustration, cynicism, and restlessness. It shows up as irritability, apathy, or quiet resentment. Many men are not angry at their circumstances. They are angry at themselves for knowing they could do more and choosing not to. That internal conflict drains joy far more effectively than external hardship ever could.

God does not reveal calling to shame men for where they are. He reveals it to invite them forward. Conviction is not condemnation. It is clarity. When a man senses there is more required of him, that awareness itself is grace. It means God is still speaking. It means the door is still open. It means the story is not finished.

There is no neutral ground in the life of a man. He is either growing or retreating, trusting or controlling, obeying or delaying. Comfort creates the illusion of stability, but spiritually it often signals stagnation. Movement is not always dramatic. Sometimes obedience looks like quiet consistency, choosing faithfulness when no one applauds. Sometimes it looks like a difficult conversation, a risky decision, or a long-term commitment that doesn’t offer immediate reward.

The men who change history rarely feel extraordinary when they begin. They feel compelled. They feel unsettled. They feel a pull they cannot ignore. God rarely calls men who believe they are ready. He calls men who are willing to be shaped along the way. Willingness is the doorway through which grace flows.

A man does not need to become someone else to step into more. He needs to stop negotiating with fear. He needs to stop waiting for perfect conditions. He needs to stop confusing delay with discernment. God meets men in motion, not in avoidance. The step you are resisting may be the very place where provision, clarity, and confidence are waiting.

This is not a call to reckless ambition. It is a call to faithful obedience. It is not about building a name. It is about stewarding what has been entrusted. God does not measure men by visible success. He measures them by faithfulness to what He asked of them. But faithfulness always requires movement. It always costs something. It always asks a man to trust God with results he cannot guarantee.

The quiet agreement that keeps men small can be broken at any moment. It is not enforced by circumstances. It is enforced by choice. The same God who called men out of obscurity, fear, and limitation is still calling today. He has not lowered His standards. He has not withdrawn His invitations. He has not run out of purpose.

What remains unanswered is not whether you are capable of more. That has already been settled. The unanswered question is whether you are willing to trust God enough to step into it.

Every man reaches a point where excuses stop working, even if they still sound convincing. He may still say the words out loud, still explain himself to others, still justify why now isn’t the time—but internally, something shifts. Deep down, he knows. He knows the difference between waiting on God and hiding behind timing. He knows when discernment has quietly turned into avoidance. That awareness is uncomfortable, but it is also sacred. It is the moment where truth begins to press against habit.

God rarely confronts men with accusation. He confronts them with invitation. When Jesus asked Peter, “Do you love Me?” He wasn’t shaming him for failure. He was reopening the door Peter assumed he had closed forever. Restoration always begins with truth, not punishment. The truth for many men is not that they have failed God, but that they have stopped expecting God to ask more of them.

Expectations shape behavior. When a man expects little of himself spiritually, he structures his life around maintenance rather than mission. Prayer becomes occasional instead of constant. Scripture becomes comfort rather than challenge. Faith becomes something he carries instead of something that carries him. Over time, this reshaping feels normal, even responsible. But the Spirit within him remains restless, because the Spirit never settles for half-surrender.

One of the most overlooked realities in Scripture is that obedience often precedes understanding. Abraham did not receive the full plan before he left. He was simply told to go. Israel did not see the Red Sea part before they stepped toward it. The disciples did not understand the resurrection while they were following Jesus. God’s pattern has never been to explain everything first. His pattern is to reveal just enough for the next step and ask for trust beyond that.

Men often say they want clarity, but what they are really asking for is control. Clarity feels safe because it reduces risk. Faith, however, thrives in trust rather than certainty. God is not withholding clarity to frustrate men. He is withholding it to grow them. Trust deepens when obedience is chosen without guarantees.

This is why faith stretches men in ways comfort never can. Comfort requires nothing. Faith demands alignment. Comfort allows compromise. Faith exposes it. Comfort numbs urgency. Faith sharpens it. A man living in comfort may appear stable, but stability without obedience is fragile. It depends entirely on circumstances remaining favorable. Faith-rooted obedience remains steady even when circumstances shift.

Men often underestimate how much their spiritual posture affects their emotional and mental health. Anxiety frequently rises when calling is ignored. Depression can deepen when purpose is postponed. These are not always chemical or circumstantial issues alone. Sometimes they are spiritual warning lights indicating misalignment. The soul reacts when it is not being used as designed. God did not wire men for passivity. He wired them for purpose.

Purpose does not always announce itself dramatically. Sometimes it emerges as a quiet nudge that refuses to go away. A repeated thought. A burden that lingers. A sense of responsibility that feels heavier than convenience. Many men ignore these signals because they expect calling to feel inspiring rather than weighty. In Scripture, calling often feels costly before it feels fulfilling. Weight is not a sign of error. It is often a sign of significance.

A man’s growth rarely requires a total life overhaul in a single moment. It usually begins with one honest decision. One admission that he has been playing small. One commitment to stop postponing obedience. One step taken without applause. Faith compounds quietly before it ever becomes visible. God honors consistency more than intensity.

Men often ask God to remove fear, but God frequently asks men to move through it. Fear does not disqualify obedience. It reveals where trust is required. Courage is not something God pours into men so they feel brave. Courage is something men practice as they obey. Each act of obedience strengthens spiritual muscle that cannot be built any other way.

The enemy’s strategy against men is rarely outright destruction. It is gradual erosion. Lower expectations. Quiet compromise. Normalized delay. The enemy understands that a man who never steps fully into his calling is far less dangerous than a man who fails loudly while trying. Failure with obedience can be redeemed. Comfort with disobedience often goes unchallenged for years.

God’s grace does not excuse stagnation. It empowers transformation. Grace is not permission to stay the same. It is provision to change. When men misunderstand grace, they confuse patience with approval. God is patient, but He is not passive. His patience is meant to lead men toward repentance, which is not just sorrow for sin but a change of direction.

Direction matters more than speed. A slow step taken in obedience moves a man closer to purpose than years of motion without alignment. God is not impressed by activity. He is honored by obedience. Many men are busy but spiritually stalled because their activity is not anchored in surrender.

Legacy is shaped less by what a man achieves and more by what he obeys. Achievement impresses people. Obedience impacts generations. Scripture does not record the resumes of faithful men. It records their obedience. Their willingness to trust God when outcomes were unclear. Their decision to move when staying would have been easier.

A man’s life becomes weighty when he stops living for validation and starts living for faithfulness. Validation is fragile. It shifts with opinion. Faithfulness anchors identity in something unchanging. A man who knows he is obeying God can endure seasons of obscurity without losing confidence. He no longer needs constant affirmation because his direction is settled.

Many men are waiting for a dramatic calling when God is asking for consistent obedience. Faithfulness in the small things prepares the heart for greater responsibility. Scripture makes this clear. Those entrusted with little and faithful with it are given more. More is never given to those who refuse to steward what they already have.

The idea that a man must wait until he feels ready before obeying is one of the most paralyzing misconceptions in faith. Readiness is rarely a prerequisite for calling. Growth happens in the process, not before it. God supplies what obedience requires, but only after obedience begins.

The moment a man stops settling is rarely celebrated. It often feels lonely. Others may not understand the shift. Some may feel threatened by it. When a man raises his standard of obedience, it exposes the comfort of those around him. Resistance often follows growth. This resistance is not proof of error. It is often confirmation that change is real.

God does not ask men to compare themselves to others. He asks them to be faithful to what they have been given. Comparison distracts from calling. It keeps men focused on outcomes rather than obedience. Faithfulness looks different in every life, but it always involves movement toward God rather than retreat into safety.

The unused capacity within a man does not vanish with time. It remains, pressing gently or painfully, depending on how long it is ignored. God’s call does not expire easily. He is patient, persistent, and faithful. But eventually, delay hardens into habit, and habit into identity. That is why response matters when conviction is fresh.

A man who chooses obedience today alters the trajectory of his future. He may not see the full impact immediately, but faithfulness always leaves a mark. It reshapes priorities. It clarifies decisions. It deepens trust. Over time, it produces a life that feels aligned rather than divided.

There is more required of you—not because you are lacking, but because you are capable. God does not call men forward to punish them. He calls them forward to partner with them. He invites them into work that matters eternally. He asks them to trust Him with what they cannot control so He can do what they cannot accomplish alone.

The quiet agreement that keeps men small can be broken in a single decision. A decision to stop hiding behind comfort. A decision to trust God with uncertainty. A decision to step forward while fear is still present. God does not demand perfection. He responds to obedience.

You are not behind. You are not disqualified. You are not forgotten. But you are responsible for how you respond now. Faith does not ask whether you feel capable. Faith asks whether you are willing.

There isn’t a man alive today who isn’t capable of doing more than he is currently doing. The difference between those who step into that truth and those who don’t is not talent, intelligence, or opportunity. It is obedience.

And obedience, once chosen, changes everything.

—

Watch Douglas Vandergraph’s inspiring faith-based videos on YouTube

Support the ministry by buying Douglas a coffee

Your friend, Douglas Vandergraph

#faith #obedience #christianmen #calling #purpose #leadership #discipleship #christianliving #faithjourney #spiritualgrowth

On Bandcamp.

For the third of my favourite albums of 2025, one that was released at the very beginning of the year: Carried Away by Quiet Houses. This is a Lab Records release, and these tracks fit wonderfully beside Tommy Lefroy¦s born blue, which was easily my favourite album of 2024. I¦m hopeful that we will get a full‐length release by Quiet Houses in early 2026 with more of these vibes.

In the meantime, we have these five tracks, which I have been spinning on repeat because it¦s just not enough for me.

Favourite track: On first listen, “Facts and Figures” stuck with me the most, and it is probably still my favourite—altho the others have grown to a place of softness and comfort as I have listened to them on repeat over the course of the year.

#AlbumOfTheWeek

On December 13th, approximately 8:35 p.m., multiple witnesses spotted Santa nearby the 4100 block of Walnut Drive in Pleasanton. This is the same street where the Candy Cane Lane Christmas Lights Drive/Walk-Through occurred. Since 1955, this cul-de-sac neighborhood portrays festive lights and music throughout the month of December.

Santa was observed siting in front of a residence greeting visitors. During an impromptu interview from the investigator’s vehicle, Santa ran away and was last seen heading west on Ray Street towards Downtown Pleasanton.

No pursuit was made due to traffic safety.

#news #parody #santa

This is an exciting time for the word “slop.” Slop is Merriam-Webster's word of the year, coworker slop is making the rounds in Slack inboxes, and goyslop, well, we don't talk about goyslop. Slop cropped up in the lexicon of the online far-right a little after the now semi-forgotten globohomo. That stands for both “global homogenization” and “global homosexuality,” by the way.

We’re all drowning in slop.

This is now a slop-based economy and culture. The slop-based economy works as such: the intersection of cheap labor and high technology enables mass production of things that are just good enough but are nothing special. If you’re a tech person, you know this as enshittification. If you’re in the humanities, you know it as kitsch. But neither of these can capture exactly what’s going on. Enshittification presumes that at some point, all the corporations truly cared about quality and customer satisfaction, which is a childish notion. Kitsch presupposes that there is such a thing as high and low culture, and most importantly, that anyone gives a fuck. Changes in technology and advances in automation and logistics have made it so that everything is produced in the same factory. This is true of material goods and immaterial products as well. It used to be easy to distinguish “quality” from “non-quality.” Quality was made by artisans and auteurs. Non-quality was mass-produced and disposable. This is no longer our world. We live in a world of disposable €2000 smartphones that go stale in 2 years and prestige TV shows with budgets in the hundreds of millions, based on popular video games, that everyone forgets in a year. Do you remember Castlevania, the animated TV show based on the eponymous Konami intellectual property? I didn’t think so, but a few years ago it was a rave. Just like McDonald’s fries, devour it now because in 15 minutes it’ll be cold and soggy.

The primary feature of the slop-based economy is a loss of haecceity. For those who play video games, the explanation will be the easiest to understand. Once upon a time, each individual game felt like its own entity with its own controls, gameplay features, etc. Today, controls have been standardized as well as the camera perspective, so every game now looks like this: a (wo)man is walking through a corridor (or alley or cosmic void of nothingness, games love that one), followed by a low-placed camera framing the back and the ass in the lower left corner of the screen:

Which of the above is The Last of Us: Part II, and which one is Resident Evil Revelations 2? Actually, trick question. Those are screenshots from Alan Wake 2 and The Evil Within 2, respectively. An even easier to grasp example is how mobile phones went from a bunch of different designs to being just black slabs, but I want to stick with video games since they’re at that intersection of art and technology where all human creativity actually is. It’s easy to mistake superficial differences in aesthetic and plot for deep markers of individuality. There aren’t any. It’s all the same thing, over and over again. Some have called it the PlayStation first-party game syndrome, as all these games are serious, feature grizzled males or tough women, and deal with such important and topical issues like humanity, individuality, civilization, and the thin veneer of it all in particular. They love that thin veneer. Snoozefest. Just like the latest iPhones’ ever-thinning bezels, the differences are measured in millimeters. Now, while I say snoozefest, the critics and audiences disagree. All these games were very highly rated.

Bringing us finally to qualityslop. Qualityslop are the things you only like because they’re good. Qualityslop is a product, physical or art or whatever else, that has lost its haecceity and now only exists within the category of whatever is socially constructed as “quality” in the given moment. Several places serve as the cathedrals of quality for the modern world. High-volume prestige publications like The New York Times still serve this purpose, but they are retreating before the two titans of contemporary thought-shaping: Reddit and YouTube.

Redditors are known primarily for their love of “quality of life features.” Go to any thread about a well-known or even well-liked video game, old or new, and Redditors will be talking about how much they love the QOL features. Or alternatively, how much they wished the game included some more QOL features. Artistic vision, atmosphere, game design, and challenge be damned — I want to be able to save anywhere.

I want to quickly examine just what happens when you listen to Redditors completely (sorry, it’ll be another video game example). In 2021, Atlus published the long-awaited follow-up to their flagship JRPG franchise Shin Megami Tensei. A few years later, they followed it up with an expanded edition subtitled Vengeance. Both of these versions owe a great deal of inspiration and influence to the company’s 2003 game Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne. That one is considered by many (and me) to be one of the best, if not the best, Japanese role-playing games of all time. Nocturne has style, ambition, and it’s uncompromising. It is exceedingly difficult, relentlessly dark, and it is my personal belief that the team actually did commune with demons when they made it. Oh, the SMT series, as it is known affectionately, is all about being Pokémon but with demons. (Fun fact: it came out several years before it.) Nocturne is minimalist; it’s focused on telling a story of survival and transformation in a demon-infested Tokyo as the protagonist assumes the role of the “demi-fiend,” a cursed creature that is part human and part demonic. To sell this idea of body horror, a world gone topsy-turvy during a cosmic event known as “the Conception,” when an old world dies, and a new one is born, the game chooses to be difficult, to intentionally introduce friction and frustration. Things don’t often go as you’d like in Nocturne. Demon fusions, which are needed to create powerful allies to fight alongside, have opaque and unexplained rules. You can only save in predesignated locations, and you’ll often die before you can reach the next save point. In Vengeance, you can save anywhere, and this annihilates most of the challenge of the game. Demon fusions are simplified with QOL features that allow you to select the exact skills you want the new creation to have. Any tension the game tries to introduce, such as having to use consumable items to change elemental affinities for your main character (these govern weaknesses in battle and are key to the system in which players and enemies can gain extra turns by exploiting them), is undercut by giving the player what is in essence an opt-out, you can purchase those items cheaply at any in-game shop. This list goes on. And in a stunning reversal of video game design philosophy, the newer game is actually less legible than its 22-year-old predecessor. Observe:

In the name of QOL, the bottom image from the new game is busy and overloaded with information. All the readouts and portraits reinforce that you’re playing a video game, interacting with a system that, once you remove the superficial stuff, is not all that dissimilar from a ClickUp dashboard. It’s been said, ars est celare artem, and Vengeance fails at this. At no point during my time with it did I feel like I was fighting to survive in a horrendous demon-infested world. I was merely optimizing my party and my skills. Yes, you also do this in Nocturne, but that’s the thing. Nocturne managed to disguise the art, the ClickUp mechanical part of the equation, and tell a story and create an atmosphere.

I mention legibility, as another feature of a slop-based economy is the emergence of a particular kind of illiteracy. This illiteracy is best exemplified by the YouTube video analysis essay. It’s so bad that it’s a meme — a 7-hour video essay to explain a 90-minute movie. These videos typically don’t have much to say; they have one or two theses, but they stretch them ad nauseam. Part of it is the much-maligned YouTube algorithm, which simply likes longer videos because people engage with longer videos longer. It’s dialectical: as people who don’t really get it try to talk about it, they get long-winded, and as the technique of the medium enforces long-windedness, people lose things to say. Writing clarifies the mind and thoughts; talking in front of a microphone has almost the opposite effect. Nevertheless, film and TV show makers are not oblivious to what’s going on. If you want visibility in a crowded world of streamers, why not focus on adding as much “deep lore” as you can so that some nerd can dissect it for 10 hours? The engagement formula is clear.

When Merriam-Webster chose the word “slop” as the word of 2025, they were doing it primarily because of “AI slop.” I won’t waste your time examining AI slop; everyone knows it, everyone has seen it, nobody likes it, but they are afraid of it. An even more horrifying reality: AI slop is not the cause of anything. It is the result. We’ve actually entered the slop-based economy long before AI even appeared. The reason why AI can emulate human writing and human artwork, or at least certain kinds of it, is because these kinds of it have become dominant in the slop factory that now spans the entire world. Every video game with QOL features thrown in, every quick and dirty illustration on a graphics tablet, every book and movie that insists on a three-act monomyth structure, that’s what made art mechanical and repeatable. Removing friction, removing creative risk, is why more and more TV shows, games, and movies feel like best-of compilations of prior works instead of new things with their own soul and identity.

Speaking of best-of compilations of prior works that can’t hold a candle to the original, there’s Nosferatu 2024. In my short Letterboxd review, I said that a remake of a foundational 100-year-old horror movie needs more than fashion photography and a prosthetic cock for Bill Skarsgard. I would ammend this now, after a conversation with a friend, that fashion photography and prosthetic cocks are no replacement for der Grauen. To take a creative risk, like choosing to make a critical video game system opaque and hard to understand, or like in the famous The Twilight Zone episode Eye of the Beholder to shoot ¾ of it with the actors facing away the camera, is to stand firm in the face of horror. Embracing tension and a lack of clarity, not trying to remove it, is what does remove it after the hard work is done. Clarification or enlightenment is not an easy task, it takes courage and guts.

In this gutless environment, where things have been flattened into slop, it’s no wonder that everything is made of slop. Low-effort cash grabs, slop. Prestige TV shows, slop. In a world made of slop, slop is slop is slop. There are no more ways to differentiate. Quality is what we say quality is on social media.

Welcome to Slop World. May I take your order?

It's funny, because I really don't have any major issues with my Windows personal laptop right now. It boots fine, and I have all the tools I need. Still, getting back to Linux has been on my mind for a long time.

Looking back, the first time I used Linux was probably around 2004. In Brazil, Linux became popular with the distro Kurumin, which was based on Knoppix. I got a book from the author on how to understand Linux, and that’s when I learned the basics. Between 2010 and 2013 I was playing around with Ubuntu. I had a dual-boot desktop with Windows and Ubuntu for years, but I never fully jumped ship because of video games and AutoCAD. Back then, running games on Linux was either too complicated (using Virtual Machines would crash a lot), or simply impossible. AutoCAD is a 2D and 3D architecture/engineering drafting and design software I used a lot, and it still doesn’t have a native Linux version.

Today, that might be a different story, and that’s exciting. Gaming on Linux has become much more viable, and I don’t use AutoCAD anymore.

This is mostly a fun project for now. I know it will be hard and time-consuming at times, but I will be learning something, and I used to love that. Or, it might be a breeze, I don’t know! For some reason, learning operating systems has always been fun for me. I don’t fully know why, but it scratches a certain itch. So I am going to embrace this experiment and see where it takes me.

I still feel a bit conflicted because I am not particularly irritated with Windows in my day to day personal use yet. I was able to disable or ignore most of the annoying things on Windows. And to be honest, it's very convenient for me to have Windows and Microsoft 365, which integrates well with my work email/calendar/files.

At the same time, this feels like an ideological question, when I look at the grand scheme of things. Do I want to keep using Microsoft as they fill everything with AI, make Windows more restricted, and increasingly push ads into the experience? There are simple things I have wanted from Windows for years, like a proper calendar widget on the desktop or better integration between Outlook and To Do (which never happened!). On Linux, I could have a completely different experience with different solutions, one I can shape and customize the way I want.

So, in the end, this Linux experiment is a great way to build for the future. It is a chance to continue exploring open source solutions and to stay in a constant state of learning. I think it is going to be an interesting journey. That is really what this is, a journey. I will learn new things, try new setups, and be part of a community that values freedom and privacy.

#linux

I have provided some hospitality to visitors from southern Germany, as best as my weak mind and feeble body could.

With the help of a few wonderful and illustrious women, I managed to serve them with salad, and lentil soup, and pizza, all of which were vegan or at least vegetarian. They left behind a reasonable amount of local currency, as a reciprocal gesture.

“We are big eaters,” one of them said, cheerily.

They requested information and I looked up some online resources to furnish them with. The following is a non-exhaustive list:

1. https://cnalifestyle.channelnewsasia.com/dining/home-cafes-singapore-coffee-matcha-trend-465956
2. https://www.wired.com/1993/04/gibson-2/
3. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268504712_Generation_Names_in_China_Past_Present_and_Future
4. https://www.nlb.gov.sg/main/article-detail?cmsuuid=d937e20c-d28d-451b-a661-951a056c8c33

After the night ended, one of their party sent a message: “So nice to meet you. Let us keep in touch.”

And so concludes one chapter in the book that is their life-sojourn. It is my undeserved privilege to have been part of their story, which has had many twists and turns, I am sure.

snapshots

bookshelf

1. Michael J. Fox. (2010). A funny thing happened on the way to the future: Twists and turns and lessons learned.
2. Editors: Ong, Zhang et al. (2023). Assault on the body: Sexual violence and the gospel community.

#lunaticus

Europe’s Green Transition Begins with Raw Materials

Europe’s relationship with China is no longer a distant geopolitical issue or a debate confined to trade balances and finished goods. It begins much further upstream — with raw materials, which are essential inputs for clean-energy and high-technology manufacturing.

As the European Union accelerates its climate and digital transitions, demand for critical raw materials such as lithium, cobalt, rare earth elements, and silicon is expected to rise sharply. These materials are indispensable for producing solar panels, batteries, wind turbines, electric vehicles, semiconductors, and advanced industrial equipment — the building blocks of modern industry and energy infrastructure. According to the International Energy Agency, China’s share of global polysilicon, ingot and wafer production will soon reach almost 95%.

In 2024, China supplied approximately 46.7% of the EU’s lithium oxide and hydroxide imports by volume, but 57.5% by value, highlighting China’s dominance in higher-grade processed lithium chemicals. Lithium hydroxide is important because it is needed to make high-performance batteries that store more energy and give electric vehicles a longer driving range.

This challenge is reflected in the European Critical Raw Materials Act (CRM Act), legislation designed to secure a sustainable and diversified supply of critical raw materials so that Europe can meet its climate and competitiveness objectives. The Act itself notes that Europe currently relies heavily on imports from third countries for critical raw materials, making supply chains vulnerable without strategic action.

A piece from the European Council highlights that for certain raw materials this reliance is especially acute: China supplies 100 % of the EU’s heavy rare earth elements, materials used in permanent magnets for wind turbines, electric motors, and advanced electronics

Raw materials are not abstract inputs. They are the starting point for every modern industrial value chain — from miners and refiners, to processors and component makers — before finished systems are ever assembled.

https://youtube.com/shorts/hEkK46819CM?si=p1ooMuAfMZ5LM59o

Pat McCarthy and ISI delegation visiting smart manufacturing sites in Baoji, Shaanxi, July 2025.

From Raw Materials to Finished Goods: China’s Embedded Role

This upstream dependence flows directly into Europe’s manufacturing and energy systems. Statistics from Eurostat state that China is now the European Union’s largest source of imports, accounting for roughly 21% of all goods imported into the EU. What matters most is not just the volume, but the composition of that trade. In 2024, manufactured goods accounted for approximately 96.7% of all EU imports from China, meaning Europe is overwhelmingly importing industrial products rather than basic commodities.

This includes:

• Clean-energy equipment such as solar panels and batteries
• Electronics, semiconductors, and circuit boards
• Machinery, tooling, automation equipment, and industrial components

These are not optional consumer goods. They are inputs into Europe’s energy infrastructure and manufacturing base.

Clean Energy and China Structural Reliance

Europe’s dependence on China is especially visible in clean energy. Analysis by the International Energy Agency shows that China controls over 80% of the global solar photovoltaic manufacturing value chain, from polysilicon processing through to finished modules, as detailed in the IEA’s report on solar PV global supply chains.

Within the EU, this dominance translates into near-total import reliance. Reporting by Reuters highlights that around 95–98% of solar panels installed in Europe are sourced from China, following the collapse of much of Europe’s domestic solar manufacturing industry in the early 2010s, as described in Reuters’ coverage of EU solar procurement.

According to SolarPower Europe’s EU Solar Market Outlook 2025-2030 (December 2025), utility-scale solar became the dominant segment in EU installations for the first time in 2025. Solar panels are not consumer goods in this context; they are capital inputs installed in power plants to generate electricity for factories, transport systems, and households. In this sense, Chinese-manufactured equipment helps power the very systems that underpin European industry.

Europe’s Manufacturing Dependence on China

China’s influence extends far beyond solar energy. European manufacturing relies heavily on Chinese inputs across sectors such as electronics, batteries, machinery, tooling, and industrial equipment.

In 2024, the European Union imported around $173.7 billion worth of electrical and electronic equipment from China, making China a major supplier of electronic components used in European technology, industrial automation, and consumer goods, according to EU import data on electrical and electronic equipment from China.

China also produces more than 50% of the world’s printed circuit boards (PCBs), which are essential intermediate components used in products ranging from automotive electronics and industrial controls to telecommunications equipment, as documented in global PCB market analysis by Prismark.

Battery supply is another area of deep integration. A significant share of the batteries imported into the European Union originates in China, underpinning electric vehicles, grid storage, and portable electronics, with China accounting for around 87 % of EU battery imports.

Machinery and industrial equipment — including machine tools, automation systems, and critical replacement parts — represent another major category of Chinese-sourced manufactured goods. In 2024, the EU imported over $100 billion worth of machinery and industrial equipment from China, illustrating the scale of China’s role in supplying industrial inputs, according to EU machinery and equipment import statistics.

These are not peripheral items. They are central to the functioning and competitiveness of modern manufacturing systems, embedded directly in Europe’s factories, production lines, and industrial infrastructure.

China’s Advantage in Scale, Speed, and Execution

China’s industrial dominance is visible not only in volume, but also in execution. Projects such as the Shanghai Maglev, which reached commercial operating speeds of up to 431 km/h, demonstrate China’s ability to translate advanced engineering into sustained, real-world operational systems, as documented in Maglev Board’s technical overview of the Shanghai Maglev.

This same combination of scale, coordination, and speed underpins China’s leadership in advanced electronics, e-commerce, electric vehicles, clean-energy systems, and emerging sectors such as humanoid robotics.

A Maglev Train departing from Pudong International Airport

Why This Changes the Skills Europe Needs

Taken together, these supply realities explain why Europe–China literacy is becoming a core professional capability. Europe’s future energy systems, manufacturing base, and economic competitiveness are closely connected to China’s industrial ecosystem. Understanding how China works — its language, culture, institutions, and business practices — is no longer optional for professionals in trade, technology, energy, logistics, diplomacy, politics, or international cooperation.

This is a matter of capability and resilience, not ideology.

---

A Practical Response: The China International Leadership Programme

The China International Leadership Programme (CILP) was created in response to this reality. Its most advanced pathway — the Ambassador for Europe–China Relations Track — is designed to develop individuals who can engage China with confidence, credibility, and real-world understanding.

The programme follows a blended model, combining structured online learning with extended immersion in China.

Core programme components include:

• Mandarin language immersion (HSK-aligned)
• Chinese cultural immersion
• Factory and smart-manufacturing site visits
• Guided exploration of iconic sites and key regions
• Leadership development through teaching and community engagement

Mandarin training is HSK-aligned, ensuring language learning is structured, measurable, and internationally recognised. Cultural immersion and industrial site visits give participants first-hand exposure to how Chinese institutions, companies, and communities operate.

Leadership is developed through contribution, particularly through teaching practice and mentoring in community settings — building adaptability, empathy, responsibility, and cross-cultural communication skills.

---

Preparing for a China-Connected Europe

As Europe navigates decarbonisation, technological change, and global competition, demand will continue to grow for people who understand China from the inside. The Ambassador for Europe–China Relations Track prepares participants for that future by combining language capability, cultural immersion, industrial insight, and leadership developed through real contribution.

This programme is not simply an international experience. It is strategic preparation for a world in which Europe’s energy systems, manufacturing base, and economic resilience remain closely connected to China.

The programme is coordinated by the Ireland Sino Institute, an organisation dedicated to strengthening Europe–China relations through education, business, philanthropy, culture, tourism, and technology.

Forr

China International Leadership Programme Overview

Sources

https://www.iea.org/reports/solar-pv-global-supply-chains/executive-summary

https://wits.worldbank.org/trade/comtrade/en/country/EUN/year/2024/tradeflow/Imports/partner/ALL/product/282520

https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/raw-materials/areas-specific-interest/critical-raw-materials/critical-raw-materials-act_en

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/critical-raw-materials/

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=China-EU_-_international_trade_in_goods_statistics

https://www.iea.org/reports/solar-pv-global-supply-chains/executive-summary

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/italy-awards-solar-capacity-first-not-made-china-auction-2025-12-11/

https://www.solarpowereurope.org/insights/outlooks/eu-solar-market-outlook-2025-2030/detail

https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.01781

https://dbrs.morningstar.com/research/436837/eu-countries-dependence-on-chinese-battery-supplies-might-become-achilles-heel-of-european-ev-manufacturing

https://tradingeconomics.com/european-union/imports/china/electrical-electronic-equipment

https://pcbflash.com/blogs/flash-insights/beyond-china?srsltid=AfmBOoqT2R_ZNdCP9yjN39UNGlWTTL0ZcMnT38jiKap7NOJ1fxDnPsOo

https://www.acea.auto/files/ACEA_Fact_sheet-EU_battery_supply_chain_and_import_reliance_.pdf

https://tradingeconomics.com/european-union/imports/china/machinery-nuclear-reactors-boilers

https://www.maglevboard.net/en/facts/26-transrapid-maglev-shanghai

https://payhip.com/b/4TdqU

https://irelandchinainstitute.eu/

https://payhip.com/AllThingsChina

© 2025 Europe China Monitor News Team