Looking for a flat used to mean filters. You set a price ceiling, ticked a box for parking, drew a rough circle on a map and scrolled. Now, increasingly, you talk. On 6 October 2026, Palo Alto Online published a report by Angela Swartz on how artificial intelligence is changing the apartment search in Silicon Valley's backyard, and the picture it painted was of a market where the listing, the questions and the answers are all starting to pass through software that speaks in fluent sentences.

The paper described rental platforms that have turned search into dialogue. Zumper's assistant, Zoe, uses information from a property's Zumper listing to answer questions about an apartment, its community and the surrounding neighbourhood, and helps schedule tours. RentCafe launched its assistant, Ren, in August. Apartments.com introduced conversational search in June. On the landlord side, the report noted that Essex Property Trust uses an AI agent named Eva to greet prospective renters through the websites of complexes including 777 Hamilton in Menlo Park and Radius in Redwood City.

Then there was the renter. A 23-year-old former investment banker told the paper he had used ChatGPT and Claude to compile property management websites and a shortlist of homes matching his price and location. “It did a pretty good job of listing out apartments that fell within those parameters,” he said. “Sometimes it would include things outside of that.” In the end, the report noted, he found an apartment “the old-fashioned way: through word of mouth.”

Zumper's chief technology officer told the paper that “the way people are searching for apartments is changing”, and said the company designed Zoe to minimise hallucinations, the term for instances in which an AI system produces inaccurate or made-up information. But, as the report put it, large language models can still make mistakes. And California's Department of Real Estate has warned that licensees remain responsible for information produced by AI.

That combination of claims raises three questions. What happens to the search for a home when every layer of it is mediated by systems that can state facts about a property that are not true? Who is responsible to a renter who acts on what a system says? And what should a person be entitled to know about how the homes put in front of them were chosen?

A Small Story With a Very Large Footprint

It is worth being precise about what the Palo Alto Online report shows and what it does not. It does not document a renter who lost money because a chatbot lied. It does not show that Zoe, Ren, Eva or Apartments.com's assistant has given anyone a false answer. Its one first-hand account from a renter is modest: a general-purpose chatbot sometimes ignored his limits, and he ended up finding his home through word of mouth.

That modesty is the point. A listing over budget or outside the chosen area is easy to spot and discard. The harder problems are the errors a renter cannot see: an answer that a building allows dogs when it does not, that a unit includes parking when it does not, that a fee is included when it is not, or that a neighbourhood is “a good fit” for reasons that have more to do with who the renter appears to be than with what they asked for.

The same report also described the other side of the counter. A Palo Alto-based property manager told the paper that he had set up a database allowing an AI tool to answer questions and check property managers' schedules to arrange tours, and that he had also seen property managers use the free version of ChatGPT to ask whether an issue needed to be brought to a lawyer or whether a new policy applied to their properties. The machine is answering on both sides of the conversation.

Every Major Portal Now Wants to Talk

The shift the paper described is not a local curiosity. It is an industry-wide bet that the search box is dying.

Zumper first announced Zoe in December 2024. HousingWire reported at the time that it could answer “virtually any renter question” about a property or its neighbourhood, from pet policies to local hotspots, and could request tours and submit leads to leasing teams. In February 2026, Zumper launched a rental search app inside ChatGPT, allowing users to type requests such as “show pet-friendly rentals under $2,500 with in-unit laundry” and receive listings without leaving the chat. In announcing it, the company cited its own survey finding that the share of renters using AI tools during their home search had risen from 4.4 per cent in 2024 to 9.8 per cent in 2025.

RentCafe, owned by the property software firm Yardi, published a feature spotlight on 20 August 2026 explaining that its former AI Mode was now called Ren. “It's an ongoing, two-way conversation,” the post said. “Instead of one search and a list of results, Ren actively guides you to apartments.” It also made a striking promise: “Ren never makes up a property, a price or an amenity. Every detail is sourced directly from trustworthy, up-to-date listings.”

CoStar Group launched Apartments.com Ai on 16 June 2026, describing it as replacing traditional filters and keyword searches with real-time conversation. “Finding an apartment is one of the most important decisions people make, yet the search process has remained largely unchanged for years,” said Andy Florance, CoStar's founder and chief executive. “Apartments.com Ai represents a fundamental shift from searching listings to having a conversation with a trusted rental advisor.”

Behind the portals sit the leasing agents. EliseAI, which sells assistants that answer prospective tenants by text, email and phone and book tours, announced on 29 September 2026 that it had raised $350 million at a $4 billion valuation, and said its platform now powers roughly one in six US apartments.

A renter may now ask a general chatbot for a shortlist, question a portal's branded assistant about a listing, and then be greeted on the building's website by a leasing agent that is also software. At no point is a human obliged to be the one who answers.

Notice the industry's vocabulary: “rental advisor”, “trusted”. It describes a relationship, not a database query. A filter that returns a listing is a tool. An adviser who tells you a flat is right for you is making a representation.

Why Fluent Software Says Things That Are Not True

Why would a system confidently state something false about a property? The short answer is that large language models are built to produce plausible text, and plausibility is not the same as truth.

In September 2025, researchers at OpenAI and Georgia Tech, Adam Tauman Kalai, Ofir Nachum, Santosh Vempala and Edwin Zhang, published a paper titled “Why Language Models Hallucinate”. Their argument was blunt: language models hallucinate because their training and evaluation procedures reward guessing over acknowledging uncertainty. If a benchmark awards a point for a correct answer and nothing for “I don't know”, a model that always guesses will outscore one that admits ignorance. The authors argued that fixing this requires changing how mainstream benchmarks are scored, not merely adding more hallucination tests.

Rental platforms try to contain the problem by grounding their assistants in listing data. Zoe draws on the property's Zumper listing; Ren, according to RentCafe, on active RentCafe listings; Apartments.com Ai on CoStar's multifamily data. Grounding narrows the space in which a model can invent things. It does not eliminate it.

Grounding fails in at least three ways that matter to renters. The first is that the source can be wrong or stale. A listing that says “pets welcome” when the landlord changed the policy last month will produce a confident, grounded and incorrect answer. The second is that the model can misread or over-generalise from what it retrieves, turning “street parking available” into “parking included”. The third is the question that has no answer in the listing at all. Is this area quiet at night? Is the building safe? Will the landlord accept my housing voucher? A system tuned to be helpful may fill the gap rather than say it does not know.

General-purpose chatbots, the kind the young renter used, sit further still from the data, summarising web pages or relying on training data that may be months old. His complaint is the mildest form of the problem, and a reminder that a model can appear to follow instructions while quietly ignoring them.

California Puts the Liability on the Licensee

California's real estate regulator has been unusually direct about who owns these errors. On 17 March 2026, the Department of Real Estate published an advisory titled “Artificial Intelligence in California Real Estate: Opportunities, Risks, and Compliance Considerations for Licensees”. Among the uses it lists are AI-powered chatbots and automated lead scoring to manage enquiries. Its message about responsibility leaves little room for doubt.

“If an AI tool generates inaccurate information, misleading advertising, or improper communications with consumers,” the advisory says, “responsibility under current law rests with the licensee and their responsible broker, not the technology provider.” It adds that “AI outputs should be reviewed for accuracy and approved by the licensee before being relied upon in transactions or consumer communications”, and that licensees using AI to draft listing descriptions, emails or online advertisements “must independently verify factual claims, including claims involving property features, pricing, availability, and potential uses”. It reminds licensees that “all real estate advertising in California must be truthful, accurate, and not misleading”, and points to section 10176 of the Business and Professions Code, which allows disciplinary action for substantial misrepresentation. It even advises keeping records “showing how AI outputs were reviewed and verified for accuracy and compliance with law.”

The state has also begun legislating against one specific kind of machine-made falsehood: the doctored photograph. Assembly Bill 723, which took effect on 1 January 2026, requires real estate brokers and salespeople who use digitally altered images in advertising to say so and to provide access to the original image. Routine adjustments such as lighting and colour are excluded. In September 2026, according to the California legislature's records, Assembly Bill 2025 was chaptered, extending a similar disclosure duty to advertisements for rental property. Its stated rationale was that virtual staging and AI tools allow anyone marketing a rental to manipulate or fabricate images showing features that are misleading or non-existent.

There is an older California law that also bears on the conversation. Since 1 July 2019, section 17941 of the Business and Professions Code has made it unlawful to use a bot to communicate with a person in California online with the intent to mislead them about its artificial identity in order to incentivise a sale of goods or services, unless the bot is clearly and conspicuously disclosed. An assistant clearly labelled as software is fine. One that passes itself off as a person, in order to close a deal, is a legal problem.

Yet the advisory has an obvious limit. It binds licensees. A real estate broker who lets a chatbot speak for them owns what it says. But a renter asking a general-purpose chatbot to find flats is not dealing with a licensee at all, and a landlord renting out its own property is not necessarily a licensee either. The more the conversation moves to software that sits outside the licensing regime, the more the regulator's clear rule is left guarding a door that renters are no longer walking through.

A Chatbot Is Still Part of the Website

When a renter acts on a wrong answer, the most useful precedent is not American. It comes from a small claims tribunal in British Columbia and a grieving airline passenger.

In February 2024, British Columbia's Civil Resolution Tribunal decided Moffatt v Air Canada. Jake Moffatt had relied on the airline's website chatbot, which told him he could apply for a bereavement fare after travelling. Another page on the same site said otherwise. Air Canada argued, in effect, that it could not be held liable for what its chatbot said. Tribunal member Christopher Rivers called this “a remarkable submission” and rejected it. “While a chatbot has an interactive component, it is still just a part of Air Canada's website,” he wrote. “It should be obvious to Air Canada that it is responsible for all the information on its website. It makes no difference whether the information comes from a static page or a chatbot.” He found negligent misrepresentation and ordered the airline to pay damages, interest and fees.

The ruling binds nobody outside British Columbia's small claims system, and the sum was modest. Its reasoning travels easily, though. Negligent misrepresentation does not care whether the careless sentence was typed by a leasing agent or generated by a model.

In the United States, the defence that platforms have historically relied on is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects online services from being treated as the publisher of information provided by someone else. But a generative assistant does not merely host a landlord's listing. It composes new sentences. The closest precedent comes from housing itself. In 2008, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, held in Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v Roommates.com that the website was not fully immune for content it helped develop, specifically mandatory questions that required users to disclose sex, family status and sexual orientation. When a service itself produces content that runs foul of the law, the court reasoned, it cannot shelter behind immunity designed for third-party speech. How far that logic extends to AI-generated answers about rental property has not been settled by the courts. It is an uncomfortable starting point for any platform arguing that its assistant's words belong to someone else.

The Accountability Chain Has Missing Links

Lay out the parties involved in a single conversational search and the problem of responsibility becomes visible.

There is the landlord or property manager, who supplies the listing and may run their own AI leasing agent. There is the listing platform, which ingests that data, wraps it in a branded assistant and decides which homes to surface. There is the company that built the underlying language model, which the platform may license. And increasingly there is a general-purpose chatbot, which may sit in front of all of them, summarising pages it found on the web.

Each can point at another. The landlord can say the platform's assistant misread the listing. The platform can say the landlord's data was wrong. The model provider's terms of service warn that outputs may be inaccurate. A general-purpose chatbot is not a licensee, not a landlord and not a listing service.

The renter, meanwhile, holds the risk: the application fee, the notice given on a current home, the signed lease. The Federal Trade Commission's December 2025 settlement with Greystar, one of the largest property managers in the United States, shows how much money can rest on what a renter is told up front. The FTC and Colorado's attorney general alleged that Greystar advertised base rents without disclosing mandatory monthly fees, so that many renters paid non-refundable application fees before learning the true price. Greystar agreed to pay $24 million, of which $23 million was earmarked for consumer refunds, and to disclose the total monthly price including mandatory fees whenever it advertises or quotes rent. FTC chairman Andrew Ferguson directed staff to begin the process of proposing a rule on unfair or deceptive fees in rental housing.

That case did not involve AI, but the principle carries: a misleading statement that a renter relies on is actionable however it was produced. The FTC said as much in September 2024, when it announced Operation AI Comply, a sweep against companies using AI in deceptive ways. “The FTC's enforcement actions make clear that there is no AI exemption from the laws on the books,” said Lina Khan, then the agency's chair.

The sensible answer to the question of responsibility is therefore not mysterious. Whoever chooses to put an AI system in front of a renter, and profits from doing so, should own what it tells that renter. That is the DRE's position for licensees, the Air Canada tribunal's position for businesses and the FTC's position for advertisers. What is missing is a rule that covers the gaps between them: the portal that is not a broker, the general chatbot that is not an advertiser, and the property manager who is neither.

Steering Without Anyone Meaning To

The most serious risk in conversational search is not a wrong fact. It is a pattern.

Under the federal Fair Housing Act, steering, guiding a homeseeker towards or away from neighbourhoods because of race or another protected characteristic, is illegal. Traditionally it required a person to do the steering. A conversational assistant can now do it at scale, without intending to, simply by reproducing patterns in the data it learned from.

Researchers have already tested this. In a paper presented at the ACM conference on Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization in October 2024, Eric Liu, Wonyoung So, Peko Hosoi and Catherine D'Ignazio of MIT audited GPT-4's housing recommendations using 168,000 prompts for renting and buying in the ten largest majority-minority cities in the United States, varying characteristics such as race, family status and source of income. They found evidence of “racial steering”, “default whiteness” and the steering of minority homeseekers towards neighbourhoods with lower opportunity indices, and concluded that such systems should be audited before deployment on real estate platforms.

A follow-up study, posted in June 2026 by Hana Samad, Trung Lam, Christoph Mügge-Durum and Michael Akinwumi, working with the National Fair Housing Alliance's responsible AI programme, framed the problem in exactly the terms the Palo Alto report raises. Large language models, they wrote, are “rapidly assuming an intermediary role in housing search through the integration of listing platforms within conversational interfaces”. Auditing seven open-weight and closed-source models across four US cities, they found that steering was an emergent behaviour that varied by model and by prompt. When users added lifestyle preferences, some models began steering where they had not before, suggesting the same stated preference could be interpreted differently depending on the user's perceived racial identity.

Industry players know this. In May 2024, Zillow released an open-source Fair Housing Classifier designed to detect questions in AI-powered real estate conversations that could lead to discriminatory responses and so reduce the risk of illegal steering. It was a sensible step. It is also voluntary, and renters have no way to know whether the assistant they are talking to uses anything like it.

The legal history here is not hypothetical. In June 2022, the US Department of Justice settled its first case challenging algorithmic discrimination under the Fair Housing Act, against Meta. The government alleged that Meta's advertising system used algorithms that relied in part on characteristics protected under the Act to decide who saw housing ads. Meta agreed to stop using its “Special Ad Audience” tool for housing ads and to build a Variance Reduction System to bring the audiences who actually saw housing ads closer to the eligible audiences by sex and estimated race or ethnicity, under court oversight that ran to 27 June 2026. “This groundbreaking resolution sets a new standard for addressing discrimination through machine learning,” said Damian Williams, then the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York.

Algorithms that decide who gets a home have been tested in court too. In November 2024, a federal judge approved a settlement under which SafeRent Solutions, a tenant-screening company, agreed to pay more than $2.2 million and to stop including its score on screening reports in certain cases, including where the applicant uses a housing voucher. The plaintiffs, led by Mary Louis, had alleged that the scoring algorithm disproportionately harmed Black and Hispanic applicants and voucher holders. SafeRent did not admit wrongdoing. “Everything is based on numbers,” Louis told the Associated Press. “You don't get the individual empathy from them.”

A conversational assistant is not a tenant screener, but it shares the structural risk. It decides which homes a renter sees, in what order and with what commentary. If its suggestions differ by who the user appears to be, the effect is the same as human steering, and far harder to detect.

Washington Steps Back as the Software Steps In

Just as these systems are spreading, federal oversight in the United States is receding.

In May 2024, the Department of Housing and Urban Development issued guidance explaining how the Fair Housing Act applies to tenant screening and to housing advertising delivered through digital platforms, including when AI and algorithms do the work. On 17 September 2025, HUD's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity withdrew a list of guidance documents it said should no longer be in effect, citing deregulatory executive orders. The digital platforms advertising guidance was among them.

In January 2026, HUD proposed removing its regulations on disparate impact liability, the theory that lets plaintiffs challenge practices that are neutral on their face but discriminatory in effect, arguing that such questions should be left to the courts. The proposal had not been finalised by early October 2026. Disparate impact still exists in case law; the Supreme Court recognised it under the Fair Housing Act in 2015. But it is precisely the theory most suited to challenging an algorithm, because algorithms rarely intend anything.

Elsewhere, enforcement has focused on what software does to the price of a home rather than what it says about one. In November 2025, the Justice Department reached a proposed settlement with RealPage over allegations that its pricing software used competitors' non-public data to help landlords align rents. A federal judge in North Carolina approved it in May 2026, barring RealPage from using that confidential data to help set rents. RealPage did not admit wrongdoing. The case shows regulators can reach into the code that shapes housing markets. It also shows how long it takes.

Scammers Already Speak the Language

There is one more party in the conversation that renters cannot afford to forget: the fraudster.

In December 2025, the FTC reported that consumers had filed nearly 65,000 reports of rental scams since 2020, with losses of about $65 million. About half of those who reported a rental scam in the 12 months to June 2025 said it began with a fake advert on Facebook. People aged 18 to 29 were three times more likely than other adults to report losing money. The FTC noted that fake listings “can often look very real and copy information from legitimate listings but are posted with the scammer's contact information on different sites.”

The FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center recorded 12,368 real estate fraud complaints and $275.1 million in reported losses in 2025, a category that includes rental fraud, up sharply from the year before.

Conversational search raises the stakes. A chatbot that searches the web cannot always tell a cloned listing from a real one, and may present both in the same confident tone. And renters are being trained to trust a friendly voice that answers instantly. The young renter in Palo Alto noticed when results drifted. Not everyone will.

What Europe and Britain Already Demand

Other jurisdictions offer partial answers to the question of what a renter should be told.

The European Union's Digital Services Act requires online platforms that use recommender systems to set out, in plain and intelligible language, the “main parameters” those systems use, including the criteria most significant in deciding what is suggested to a user and the reasons for their relative importance. The largest platforms must offer at least one option not based on profiling. Applied to rental search, that principle would mean a renter could find out why these homes, in this order, rather than others.

The EU's AI Act adds a simpler duty. Since 2 August 2026, Article 50 has required that people interacting directly with an AI system be informed that they are doing so, unless it is obvious. Fines for breaching the Act's transparency obligations can reach €15 million or 3 per cent of worldwide annual turnover.

Britain has taken a different route, focusing on what listings must contain rather than how software presents them. National Trading Standards' Estate and Letting Agency Team has issued guidance on “material information” in property listings; for lettings, this includes the rent, any deposit and the council tax band. The Renters' Rights Act 2025, whose first phase came into force in England on 1 May 2026, made it illegal for landlords and agents to invite or accept bids above the advertised rent, and to discriminate against prospective tenants because they have children or receive benefits, including through advertising. Since April 2025, the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 has allowed the Competition and Markets Authority to enforce consumer law directly and to fine businesses up to 10 per cent of global turnover.

None of these laws was written for a chatbot that recommends flats. But together they sketch something the US lacks: a baseline of what must be disclosed, a ban on certain kinds of exclusion at the advertising stage and a regulator with the power to act quickly.

What a Renter Should Be Entitled to Know

If the conversation is the new front door to housing, renters need rights that match. Drawing together the DRE's advisory, the Air Canada ruling, the fair housing case law and the European rules, a workable set begins to emerge.

First, renters should know they are talking to a machine and on whose behalf: a portal, a landlord or neither, and whether suggested homes include paid placements. California's bot law and the EU AI Act already point this way.

Second, renters should know where each fact came from. If an assistant says a unit allows dogs, it should show the dated listing text it relied on. Grounded systems already retrieve this; displaying it costs little.

Third, renters should be told why homes were suggested and ranked. The DSA offers a model: the main criteria, their relative importance and an option to search without profiling.

Fourth, assistants should be built to say “I don't know”. Questions about safety, schools or the “character” of a neighbourhood are where steering risk is highest and listing data thinnest. The OpenAI researchers' case for rewarding abstention applies to product design as much as to benchmarks.

Fifth, the business that deploys an assistant should be liable for what it says, as if a human employee had said it. That is already the DRE's rule for licensees and the Air Canada tribunal's reasoning for businesses. Extending it explicitly to listing platforms and property managers who are not licensees would close the gap the conversational shift has opened.

Sixth, conversational housing assistants should be audited for steering before deployment and at regular intervals, with results published. The MIT and NFHA studies show that such audits are feasible. The Meta settlement shows that algorithmic delivery can be measured against a fairness benchmark and corrected under oversight.

Finally, renters should be able to keep a transcript of the conversation. If an answer led someone to pay a fee or sign a lease, it is the evidence. The DRE already tells licensees to keep records. Renters deserve the same.

Word of Mouth Still Beats the Machine

It is easy to read the Palo Alto Online report as a story about technology that does not quite work yet. That misses the point. These assistants will improve, and the young renter's complaint may soon feel quaint.

The deeper issue is structural. Housing search used to involve a listing written by a landlord, a portal that displayed it and a renter who read it. Each statement had an author. In conversational search, the sentence a renter acts on may be composed on the fly by a system nobody fully controls, drawing on data nobody fully checked, ranked by criteria nobody disclosed. The industry describes that system as an adviser. The law has not yet decided whether it should be treated as one.

California's regulator has answered half the question: if a licensee lets AI speak, the licensee answers for it. Courts have hinted at more: a chatbot is part of the business that runs it. Europe and Britain have begun to set out what a person must be told. What nobody has yet written down is a single rule that follows the renter rather than the type of company they happen to be talking to.

Until that exists, the renter in Palo Alto may have found the most reliable method of all. He asked the machines, noticed where they drifted, and in the end found his home through word of mouth. The question for regulators and platforms is whether the next generation of renters will have to do the same.

---

References

1. Swartz, Angela. “How AI is changing the apartment search: Is it working?” Palo Alto Online, 6 October 2026. https://www.paloaltoonline.com/technology/2026/10/06/how-ai-is-changing-the-apartment-search-is-it-working/
2. Andrews, Jeff. “Zumper launches AI assistant Zoe.” HousingWire, 3 December 2024. https://www.housingwire.com/articles/zumper-ai-assistant-zoe/
3. Inman. “Zumper introduces Zoe, latest AI for aspiring renters.” Inman, 10 December 2024. https://inman.com/2024/12/10/zumper-introduces-zoe-latest-ai-for-aspiring-renters
4. National Mortgage Professional. “Zumper Debuts Real-Time Rental Search App Inside ChatGPT.” February 2026. https://nationalmortgageprofessional.com/news/zumper-debuts-real-time-rental-search-app-inside-chatgpt
5. Petrut, Florin. “Meet Ren, your apartment search assistant on RentCafe.com.” RentCafe Blog, 20 August 2026. https://www.rentcafe.com/blog/renting/rentcafe-feature-spotlight-ai-mode/
6. Mann Report. “CoStar Group Launches Apartments.com Ai.” Mann Report, 16 June 2026. https://www.mannpublications.com/mannreport/2026/06/16/costar-group-launches-apartments-com-ai/
7. Gleeson, Cailey. “EliseAI banks $350M, hits $4B valuation for accelerated new product development.” Fierce Healthcare, 29 September 2026. https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/finance/eliseai-banks-350m-hits-4b-valuation-accelerated-new-product-development
8. Kalai, Adam Tauman; Nachum, Ofir; Vempala, Santosh S.; Zhang, Edwin. “Why Language Models Hallucinate.” arXiv:2509.04664, 4 September 2025. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.04664
9. California Department of Real Estate. “Artificial Intelligence in California Real Estate: Opportunities, Risks, and Compliance Considerations for Licensees.” Advisory, 17 March 2026. https://www.dre.ca.gov/Licensees/Advisories/Advisory_2026_03_17_AI_in_California_Real_Estate.html
10. California Legislature. AB 723 (2025), Real estate: digitally altered images: disclosure. CalMatters Digital Democracy. https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab723
11. California Legislature. AB 2025 (2026), Tenancy: digitally altered images: disclosure, Chapter 572, Statutes of 2026. CalMatters Digital Democracy. https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab2025
12. Perkins Coie. “I Am Robot: California's New Law Requires Disclosure of Use of Bots.” https://perkinscoie.com/insights/blog/i-am-robot-californias-new-law-requires-disclosure-use-bots
13. Moffatt v Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149, Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, 14 February 2024; reported in CTV News, “Air Canada's chatbot gave a B.C. man the wrong information. Now, the airline has to pay for the mistake,” February 2024. https://bc.ctvnews.ca/air-canada-s-chatbot-gave-a-b-c-man-the-wrong-information-now-the-airline-has-to-pay-for-the-mistake-1.6769454
14. Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. Roommates.com, LLC, 521 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc); Congressional Research Service, “Liability of Interactive Computer Service for Violating the Fair Housing Act,” RS22668. https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RS22668.html
15. Federal Trade Commission and Colorado Attorney General. “Weiser, FTC announce $24M settlement with Greystar.” 2 December 2025. https://coag.gov/press-releases/weiser-ftc-announce-24m-settlement-with-greystar/
16. Davis Polk. “FTC announces new enforcement initiative targeting deceptive AI practices.” September 2024. https://www.davispolk.com/insights/client-update/ftc-announces-new-enforcement-initiative-targeting-deceptive-ai-practices
17. Liu, Eric; So, Wonyoung; Hosoi, Peko; D'Ignazio, Catherine. “Racial Steering by Large Language Models: A Prospective Audit of GPT-4 on Housing Recommendations.” EAAMO '24, ACM, October 2024. MIT DSpace. https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/157628
18. Samad, Hana; Lam, Trung; Mügge-Durum, Christoph; Akinwumi, Michael. “The Geography of Algorithmic Judgment: LLM Intermediaries, Place Identity, and Racial Steering in Housing Search.” arXiv:2606.06694, 4 June 2026. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.06694
19. Zillow Group. “Zillow providing open-source technology to promote fair housing in AI-powered real estate conversations.” Press release, 21 May 2024. https://zillow.mediaroom.com/2024-05-21-Zillow-providing-open-source-technology-to-promote-fair-housing-in-AI-powered-real-estate-conversations
20. US Department of Justice. “Justice Department Secures Groundbreaking Settlement Agreement with Meta Platforms, Formerly Known as Facebook, to Resolve Allegations of Discriminatory Advertising.” 21 June 2022. https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-secures-groundbreaking-settlement-agreement-meta-platforms-formerly-known
21. US Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York. “United States Attorney Implements Groundbreaking Settlement With Meta Platforms, Inc.” January 2023. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/united-states-attorney-implements-groundbreaking-settlement-meta-platforms-inc-formerly
22. Bedayn, Jesse. “Class action lawsuit on AI-related discrimination reaches final settlement.” Associated Press, 20 November 2024, as published by Fortune, 21 November 2024. https://fortune.com/2024/11/21/renter-scoring-saferent-million-settle-case-algorithm-discriminating-race-income/
23. US Department of Housing and Urban Development. “HUD Issues Fair Housing Act Guidance on Applications of Artificial Intelligence.” Press release 24-098, 2 May 2024. https://archives.hud.gov/news/2024/pr24-098.cfm
24. Bilowich, Juliana. “HUD Withdraws Wide-Ranging Fair Housing Policies.” LeadingAge, 23 September 2025. https://leadingage.org/hud-withdraws-wide-ranging-fair-housing-policies/
25. Ballard Spahr. “HUD proposes to remove its Fair Housing Act disparate impact rule.” Consumer Finance Monitor, 14 January 2026. https://www.consumerfinancemonitor.com/2026/01/14/hud-proposes-to-remove-its-fair-housing-act-disparate-impact-rule/
26. Baker McKenzie. “United States: DOJ settles RealPage case.” December 2025. https://www.bakermckenzie.com/en/insight/publications/alerts/2025/12/united-states-doj-settles-realpage-case
27. Lowe, Jonathan; Praats, Michael. “RealPage settles with DOJ over rent pricing scheme; NC case still active.” WSOC-TV, 20 May 2026. https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/realpage-settles-with-doj-over-rent-pricing-scheme-nc-case-still-active/AKJI2ZH7R5GOHIK3JGVIPKM4HM/
28. Federal Trade Commission. “FTC Analysis Shows Consumers Have Lost Millions to Rental Scams.” Press release, 22 December 2025. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/12/ftc-analysis-shows-consumers-have-lost-millions-rental-scams
29. Block, Eliana. “Online real estate fraud climbed to $275M in 2025, FBI says.” National Association of Realtors, 13 April 2026. https://www.nar.realtor/news/real-estate-news/online-real-estate-fraud-climbed-to-275m-in-2025-fbi-says
30. HousingWire. “FBI cybercrime losses: real estate fraud hits $275M.” April 2026. https://www.housingwire.com/articles/fbi-cybercrime-losses-real-estate-fraud-hits-275m/
31. European Parliament and Council. Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 (Digital Services Act), Articles 27 and 38. Official Journal of the European Union, 27 October 2022. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32022R2065
32. European Parliament and Council. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Artificial Intelligence Act), Articles 50 and 99. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj
33. National Trading Standards Estate and Letting Agency Team. “Material information in property listings: Part A.” https://www.nationaltradingstandards.uk/uploads/Material%20information%20-%20Part%20A%20-%20updated%20July%202022.pdf
34. UK Government. “Renters' Rights Act: an overview for landlords.” GOV.UK. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/renters-rights-act-an-overview-for-landlords
35. DLA Piper. “CMA's new consumer enforcement regime comes into force in April 2025.” 7 April 2025. https://www.dlapiper.com/insights/publications/2025/04/cmas-new-consumer-enforcement-regime-comes-into-force-in-april-2025

---

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

Listen to the free weekly SmarterArticles Podcast

Support What We Do

FICTIONAL WHAT IF: Part I- What if Gus Fring had Walter White Killed Instead of Hiring Him?

I'm starting a new WHAT IF series, this time focused on fictional alternate history. We will start with a pretty straight forward one—what if Gus Fring had the good sense not to hire Walter White and instead took him off the board immediately? Things would have gone immensely better for him... and basically everyone else. Let's find out how:

---

I — The Death of Walter White An alternate history of the Fring drug empire, 2009–2012

The decisive turning point in the history of Gustavo Fring's criminal organization occurred in 2009, following Walter White's murder of two street-level methamphetamine dealers employed by Fring's distribution network. In the original course of events, Fring attempted to eliminate White and replace him with Gale Boetticher, only for Jesse Pinkman to murder Boetticher before the replacement could occur. In this alternate chronology, Fring acted more decisively. After determining that Boetticher had acquired sufficient knowledge of White's manufacturing process, Fring authorized Mike Ehrmantraut to arrange White's death. The killing was made to resemble a fatal automobile accident, thereby avoiding the complications associated with an unexplained disappearance. Pinkman, meanwhile, remained in hiding, believing that his own death was imminent. Although Fring initially considered killing both men, Ehrmantraut argued that Pinkman represented a considerably smaller threat than White. Unlike his former partner, Pinkman had neither the ambition nor the financial resources to organize a competing operation. Furthermore, eliminating two individuals associated with the same criminal enterprise in quick succession would increase the likelihood of attracting unwanted attention. Fring ultimately accepted this reasoning, authorizing Ehrmantraut to locate Pinkman and present him with a choice between returning to the organization under strict supervision or permanently leaving New Mexico. The decision would have profound implications for the future of the Southwestern drug trade.

Walter White's death initially appeared to represent a successful resolution of Fring's most immediate operational difficulties. Boetticher assumed full responsibility for production at the industrial laundry facility, and the transition proceeded with relatively little disruption. Although Boetticher was unable to consistently replicate White's extraordinary purity, his product remained substantially superior to nearly everything else available in the regional methamphetamine market. Production stabilized at approximately 96 percent purity, and the laboratory resumed its regular manufacturing schedule. Boetticher proved particularly valuable because of his willingness to follow instructions, maintain detailed production records, and work without demanding an increasing share of the organization's revenue. His limited understanding of criminal organizations made him less effective at identifying potential security threats, but Fring considered this an acceptable weakness in an employee whose activities were almost entirely confined to a controlled industrial environment. The absence of White also prevented a series of operational crises that would otherwise have threatened the organization, including the destruction of the laboratory, the exposure of its surveillance systems, and the eventual disclosure of its connection to Madrigal Electromotive. Fring's legitimate business activities continued to expand, providing a growing financial and logistical foundation for his drug operation.

The situation involving Jesse Pinkman proved more complicated. Ehrmantraut located Pinkman several weeks after White's death and arranged a meeting under circumstances that made clear the young man was in no position to negotiate. Pinkman correctly suspected that Fring had ordered White's murder, although he possessed no evidence beyond his knowledge of their deteriorating relationship. His hostility toward the organization was considerable, particularly because of the earlier deaths of the two dealers and the murder of Tomás Cantillo. Ehrmantraut nevertheless succeeded in convincing Pinkman that attempting retaliation would almost certainly result in his own death and might endanger the people closest to him. Pinkman initially chose to leave the methamphetamine business, but his inability to establish financial independence, combined with continuing drug use and psychological difficulties, eventually led him back into contact with Ehrmantraut. Rather than immediately returning him to the laboratory, Ehrmantraut began employing Pinkman in relatively minor logistical assignments. These tasks served the dual purpose of providing Pinkman with income and allowing Ehrmantraut to determine whether he could be trusted. Over time, Pinkman's willingness to accept personal danger, combined with his unexpected competence in several difficult situations, gradually improved his standing within the organization. Fring remained skeptical, but Ehrmantraut increasingly regarded Pinkman as a useful subordinate rather than an uncontrollable liability.

The greatest challenge confronting Fring remained his deteriorating relationship with the Mexican cartel. The deaths of Tuco Salamanca, the Salamanca twins, and Juan Bolsa had already significantly weakened the cartel's operations north of the border, while Fring's growing independence threatened Don Eladio Vuente's authority over the regional drug trade. The cartel's campaign against Fring's distribution network intensified throughout the following months, with attacks on shipments, intimidation of personnel, and attempts to disrupt the supply of essential chemicals. Fring understood that a prolonged conflict would eventually compromise his operation, regardless of its superior efficiency. He therefore resumed preparations for a decisive strike against the cartel leadership, using the possibility of sharing his superior manufacturing process as the basis for renewed negotiations. Boetticher was far too valuable to surrender to the cartel, and his sheltered personality made him poorly suited to operating within a hostile criminal organization. Pinkman, however, had practical experience with White's process and was increasingly proficient at reproducing it. Under Boetticher's supervision, Pinkman underwent several months of additional training before being presented to the cartel as an independent manufacturing specialist. The arrangement was particularly attractive to Fring because it allowed him to demonstrate his willingness to cooperate without sacrificing the chemist upon whom his organization depended.

The eventual confrontation with Don Eladio unfolded in a manner remarkably similar to Fring's original plan. Pinkman traveled to Mexico with Fring and Ehrmantraut, where he demonstrated that he could manufacture high-quality methamphetamine using the cartel's existing facilities. The demonstration impressed the cartel's leadership and removed one of the principal obstacles to negotiating a settlement. During a subsequent gathering at Eladio's estate, Fring arranged for the cartel leadership to consume poisoned tequila, killing Eladio and numerous senior associates in a single operation. The resulting confusion allowed Fring's party to escape, although Ehrmantraut suffered a serious gunshot wound and Fring himself required treatment for poisoning. Pinkman's actions during the escape proved instrumental in preserving Ehrmantraut's life, establishing a bond between the two men that would persist long after their return to Albuquerque. Unlike the original sequence of events, however, Fring returned to New Mexico without facing an immediate threat from Walter White. There was no improvised bomb, no conspiracy involving Hector Salamanca, and no destruction of the industrial laboratory. Fring emerged from the confrontation as the undisputed leader of the most technologically sophisticated methamphetamine manufacturing and distribution network in the American Southwest.

The destruction of the cartel leadership produced significant consequences beyond Fring's organization. Although Don Eladio's death eliminated the central authority governing much of the cartel's northern distribution system, it did not eliminate the numerous subordinate organizations operating throughout Mexico. Regional traffickers, surviving lieutenants, and independent criminal groups began competing for territory previously governed through Eladio's network. Fring initially benefited from the disruption, particularly because his domestic manufacturing facilities allowed him to operate without importing finished methamphetamine from Mexico. Nevertheless, the collapse of the cartel created a less predictable environment along the border, with numerous smaller organizations competing for access to American distribution markets. Fring adopted a policy of selective accommodation, supplying certain regional distributors while using intimidation and financial pressure to prevent others from challenging his established routes. His objective was not to become the dominant trafficker throughout Mexico, which would have required resources and relationships he did not possess, but rather to ensure that no successor to Eladio could exercise meaningful control over his American operations. Hector Salamanca remained alive in his nursing home, having survived the deaths of nearly every significant member of his family. Fring continued visiting him periodically, using the destruction of the cartel and the apparent extinction of Salamanca influence as instruments of psychological revenge. Without Walter White to supply an explosive device, however, Salamanca possessed no practical means of arranging Fring's assassination.

For Mike Ehrmantraut, the elimination of White marked the beginning of the most stable period of his employment under Fring. His responsibilities expanded following the cartel's destruction, as the organization consolidated distribution routes and established relationships with new suppliers and intermediaries. Ehrmantraut retained overall responsibility for internal security, employee discipline, and the management of individuals possessing sensitive knowledge of the operation. The absence of White prevented the escalating conflict that had previously forced Ehrmantraut to choose between his loyalty to Fring and his personal survival. Victor remained alive, having never been implicated in Boetticher's murder, while Tyrus Kitt continued serving as an important member of the security apparatus. The organization's personnel structure consequently remained more experienced and cohesive than it had been during its final months in the original chronology. Ehrmantraut also avoided the financial catastrophe associated with the subsequent federal investigation, preserving his ability to provide for his granddaughter Kaylee. His relationship with Pinkman, however, introduced a growing conflict into his duties. Ehrmantraut recognized that Pinkman had become increasingly capable and loyal to him personally, but he also understood that Pinkman's resentment toward Fring had never entirely disappeared. As the years passed, Ehrmantraut became an informal intermediary between the two men, occasionally persuading Fring to overlook behavior that would have resulted in severe punishment for another employee.

The continued survival of Fring also transformed the position of Lydia Rodarte-Quayle within Madrigal Electromotive. In the original chronology, the collapse of Fring's organization forced Rodarte-Quayle to improvise new relationships with Walter White, Declan, and eventually Jack Welker's criminal associates. None of these developments occurred. Instead, Rodarte-Quayle remained responsible for a sophisticated supply arrangement that provided the Fring organization with access to industrial chemicals, transportation infrastructure, and international business contacts. Peter Schuler, whose association with Fring would otherwise have been exposed during the federal investigation, retained his executive position at Madrigal. The company's legitimate operations continued to provide concealment for a criminal enterprise whose revenues were becoming increasingly substantial. Rodarte-Quayle proposed expanding distribution into the Czech Republic, where her commercial contacts could facilitate access to an established market for methamphetamine. Fring initially resisted the proposal because of the additional exposure created by international shipments, but eventually authorized a limited expansion using separate intermediaries and transportation arrangements. By 2011, the organization had established a modest but profitable European distribution network. Rodarte-Quayle's importance increased accordingly, although her anxiety over potential exposure became a persistent source of tension with Ehrmantraut, who regarded her tendency toward panic as a greater operational risk than most of the organization's competitors.

Declan's organization in Arizona experienced a substantially different trajectory. Without the destruction of Fring's laboratory, the regional methamphetamine market never underwent the sudden supply disruption that had allowed competing manufacturers to expand. Declan continued producing a lower-purity product and supplying independent distributors, but he faced increasingly strong competition from Fring's established network. The destruction of Eladio's cartel created limited opportunities for expansion, particularly in areas previously dependent upon Mexican imports, but Fring's distribution capabilities placed an effective ceiling on Declan's ambitions. By late 2010, Declan was confronted with a choice between challenging Fring's organization directly or accepting a subordinate position within a market increasingly dominated by superior product. He chose a cautious accommodation, gradually shifting some of his business toward distribution rather than attempting to compete through independent manufacturing. Fring tolerated Declan's continued existence because he served secondary markets without significantly threatening the larger organization. Crucially, Declan never entered into a methylamine transaction with Walter White, never acquired White's formula, and never became the target of Jack Welker's gang. His criminal enterprise survived, although it never achieved the prominence it briefly enjoyed following Fring's death in the original timeline. Declan ultimately became an example of the smaller regional traffickers who prospered only to the extent that Fring permitted them to operate.

The most consequential development within federal law enforcement was the absence of any substantial investigation connecting Gustavo Fring to the methamphetamine trade. Hank Schrader remained interested in the unidentified manufacturer known as Heisenberg, but Walter White's death effectively brought that investigation to a dead end. Schrader continued recovering from the injuries inflicted by the Salamanca twins, eventually returning to active duty, although his earlier confrontation with Jesse Pinkman complicated his ability to pursue leads involving White's former associate. Because Gale Boetticher remained alive, there was no homicide investigation that could expose his notebooks, no Los Pollos Hermanos evidence recovered from his apartment, and no apparent reason to investigate Fring's relationship with the industrial laundry. Fring continued maintaining cordial relationships with local law enforcement officials, including members of the DEA, while his restaurants retained their reputation as successful legitimate businesses. Schrader occasionally revisited the unresolved Heisenberg investigation, particularly as blue methamphetamine continued appearing in regional seizures, but he increasingly concluded that White's mysterious former manufacturer had either died or withdrawn from the business. His inability to connect White to the operation prevented him from recognizing the most important investigative lead available to him: the disappearance of his own brother-in-law from the criminal enterprise at precisely the time Fring consolidated control. Steven Gomez remained alive, and George Merkert retained his position as head of the Albuquerque DEA office, having never faced the scandal associated with his relationship with Fring. Schrader therefore did not receive the same rapid advancement that followed Merkert's resignation in the original chronology.

Walter White's death had equally profound consequences for his family, although these developed largely outside the criminal world. Skyler White had already learned that her husband was involved in manufacturing methamphetamine, and she privately suspected that his death was connected to his activities. Nevertheless, the absence of direct evidence, combined with her concerns for Walter Jr. and Holly, discouraged her from disclosing the full extent of his criminal involvement. Saul Goodman assisted her in managing some of Walter's remaining financial affairs, carefully distancing himself from anything that might attract federal scrutiny. The proposed acquisition of the A1A Car Wash never developed into the elaborate money-laundering operation that existed in the original chronology, leaving Skyler with a comparatively modest financial position despite the substantial sums Walter had earned. Her involvement with Ted Beneke's financial irregularities remained an independent problem, but she no longer possessed access to the continuing flow of methamphetamine profits that had allowed her to resolve his tax liabilities. Walter Jr. grew up believing that his father had died in an automobile accident following a prolonged period of personal and marital difficulties. Hank and Marie provided support to the family, neither recognizing that the man responsible for Walter's death was a respected local businessman with whom Hank had maintained friendly relations. Goodman, meanwhile, continued operating his Albuquerque law practice without becoming involved in the catastrophic criminal conflicts that would otherwise have forced him to abandon his identity and flee to Nebraska.

The absence of Walter White also prevented the emergence of Jack Welker's gang as a major force in the regional methamphetamine trade. Todd Alquist continued his association with his uncle's criminal circle but never encountered White through the elaborate manufacturing arrangements that followed Fring's death. The methylamine train robbery never occurred, and Drew Sharp was consequently never murdered while witnessing the operation. Welker's organization remained involved in various criminal activities, but it lacked access to White's manufacturing expertise and never accumulated the enormous methamphetamine revenues that had enabled its rapid expansion. The coordinated prison murders of Fring's former employees also never took place, as the organization had neither collapsed nor left behind a group of incarcerated witnesses capable of exposing its operations. Dennis Markowski and the other personnel associated with the industrial laundry remained employed or otherwise under Fring's protection. The result was a considerably more stable criminal environment in Albuquerque, although this stability largely reflected the consolidation of organized criminal authority rather than any reduction in the underlying drug trade. Fring's organization continued supplying enormous quantities of methamphetamine, with the associated addiction, violence, and exploitation occurring primarily beyond the immediate attention of its leadership.

Jesse Pinkman's position within the organization remained its most significant internal uncertainty. Following the successful operation in Mexico, Fring regarded Pinkman as a useful but ultimately expendable employee, while Ehrmantraut increasingly considered him a potential successor in certain security and logistical functions. Pinkman had accumulated substantial personal wealth, and his renewed relationship with Andrea Cantillo provided an opportunity to establish a life beyond the drug trade. Andrea survived, Brock was never poisoned, and neither became a target of Walter White's increasingly elaborate attempts to manipulate his former partner. Nevertheless, Pinkman remained psychologically damaged by the deaths of Jane Margolis, Tomás Cantillo, and Walter White, as well as his own participation in the cartel massacre. By 2011, he had largely withdrawn from direct manufacturing and was employed intermittently by Ehrmantraut in work involving transportation and security. Fring eventually permitted him to reduce his involvement further, provided he maintained complete silence about the organization's activities. Ehrmantraut supported the arrangement, recognizing that Pinkman's continued presence within the criminal enterprise carried substantial risks. Pinkman consequently achieved a degree of independence that had been impossible under White's influence, although he never entirely escaped the consequences of his association with Fring.

By 2012, Gustavo Fring had accomplished virtually everything he had originally intended. Don Eladio and the senior leadership of the Mexican cartel were dead, the Salamanca family's power had been destroyed, and his industrial laboratory continued operating without interruption. Gale Boetticher remained a productive and reliable chemist, Mike Ehrmantraut managed an experienced security organization, and Lydia Rodarte-Quayle oversaw a growing international supply and distribution network. Declan and other regional competitors operated at the margins of a market Fring increasingly controlled, while federal investigators remained unaware of the true ownership of one of the largest methamphetamine operations in North America. Yet the apparent stability of the organization concealed structural weaknesses. Its continued success depended upon a small collection of individuals possessing intimate knowledge of its activities, several of whom had become increasingly uncomfortable with their involvement. Rodarte-Quayle's expanding international operations introduced new documentary and financial vulnerabilities, while the decentralized criminal groups that emerged following Eladio's death created unpredictable security problems along the Mexican border. Pinkman's continuing resentment toward Fring also remained unresolved, creating the possibility that a man whom Fring had deliberately spared might eventually become his most dangerous surviving witness.

The central consequence of Walter White's death was therefore not the elimination of methamphetamine production in Albuquerque, but the prevention of the organizational collapse that White ultimately caused. Numerous individuals who died during the final years of White's criminal career survived, including Hank Schrader, Steven Gomez, Mike Ehrmantraut, Gale Boetticher, Andrea Cantillo, and the members of Fring's security organization. Conversely, the survival of Fring's empire allowed the industrial production and distribution of methamphetamine to continue on a substantially greater scale and over a much longer period. White's death prevented several spectacular episodes of violence, but it also preserved a criminal organization whose efficiency permitted less visible harm to accumulate over years rather than months.

By the conclusion of this alternate history, Fring had won the struggle that destroyed him in the original timeline. His victory was not absolute, however. The empire's greatest vulnerability remained the same fundamental problem that had existed when he first hired Walter White: the impossibility of exercising complete control over the individuals upon whom his enterprise depended. In eliminating White while sparing Pinkman, Fring had removed his most immediate enemy, but he had also preserved the one individual who understood both the moral cost of the organization and the personal circumstances surrounding White's death. Whether Pinkman would ever act upon that knowledge remained uncertain. For the moment, however, Fring was alive, wealthy, increasingly powerful, and almost entirely beyond the reach of the authorities.

Fine, ill admit it. i never really cared about humans. i only cared and care for an angel and the unfortunate man sharing my living arrangements. and i know thats not new or shocking to hear from me. but sometimes i really forget it. i never cared for the people who spend their hours with me, i just pretending to care. and im good at that. im good at pretending, im good at making people believe that ive actually care. i never, and i barely remember whoever i pretending to care for, to be honest. i never really cared to even think about it, to even think about who was i caring for, because it never was true. i just enjoy seeing the way they react when they realise the truth. its fun, i enjoy it, you can call me a sadist with an obsession. never would care about whatever you would claim that to be. something about me and enjoying ruining peoples lives will always be a part of me. i never make mistakes. i do it on purpose. i leave people on purpose. i tend to. well, make them believe everything. make them feel so safe and think that whatever comes from me is purely from my heart. spoiler: it never was. i just enjoy seeing people shed their sad sad sad poor tears into my pretty lies. and i dont feel bad about that. thats not why im here. i just sometimes laugh at it. laugh at the way i used to be. the way i enjoyed all that. now, i dont know. i dont think i feel the way i used to. i still enjoy running peoples lives of course. ending them, too. i just dont seem to bee, capable? able? whatever. its not because i feel bad for humans. that would be worse than comparing a sewer to a perfume shop. i just dont know what changed me. when i met this pearly angel. everything that felt easy to do, went absolutely hard to fathom. i dont hate it. i just cant believe that ive left all that, that ive changed like this. for someone. well, shes not someone. shes an angel and i know im sure angels wouldnt accept such things. but shes my angel. oh, god. look at that, just look at that. ahmed being allll romantic. very romantic. well, now that i ruined whatever i wanted to say. ill just leave it like that.

I still have difficulty sleeping. Maybe thats why i keep embarrassing myself.

Sincerely, insomniac.

In Summary: * Listening to WTMJ, radio home of the Brewers, ahead of tonight's baseball game. GO BREWERS!

Also, this has been a good day for doing things with the wife: the brunch at Lin's; a major project here at home in the morning; exploring, driving to a new Clinic where I have an appointment in a few days; talking through different issues in the afternoon, etc.

And the adventure continues.

Prayers, etc.: * I have a daily prayer regimen I try to follow throughout the day from early morning, as soon as I roll out of bed, until head hits pillow at night.

Health Metrics: * bw= 211.20 lbs. * bp= 128/76 (75)

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

Diet: * 07:40 – 1 banana, 1 sausage burrito * 12:30 – big 4-plate buffet brunch * 15:00 – Arby's Roast Beef Sandwich

Activities, Chores, etc.: * 06:10 – wake * 06:50 – bank accounts activity monitored * 07:00 -read, write, pray, follow news reports from various sources, surf the socials, take daily meds, unpack, organize * 10:30 – exploring, find location of new doctor's office ahead of next week's appointment * 12:30 – big buffet brunch with Sylvia * 13:40 – back home in time to catch the 4th Quarter of the IU / Michigan game

Chess: * 17:30 – moved in all pending CC games; losing 2, and winning 1.

Love is action.

Genius is masterpiece.

2026 World Series Game 2

The Milwaukee Brewers and Tampa Bay Rays meet again tonight in the second game of this year's MLB World Series, and this will be my Saturday's game of choice. The game is scheduled to start at 7:00 PM CDT. As I usually do during the regular season, I'll be following the game's scores and stats in real time via MLB's Gameday Service, and I'll listen to the radio pregame show and the call of the game provided by announcers of WTMJ 620, Wisconsin.

I tried following Game 1 last night over the MLB Netework, and over FOX, but quickly found myself put off by the presentations of both networks. I am clearly NOT a member of their target demographic. Constant references to betting odds, and ads for different betting companies, constant adds for beer, wine and spirits (on MLB Network, especially) disgusted me. I don't gamble and I don't drink alcohol. So I went to my old favorite, MLB's Gameday Service, and the excellent announcers of WTMJ. And I enjoyed the baseball game. And I'm planning to do that again tonight.

And the adventure continues.

Quick and easy preparation, and pretty good taste for the effort

Ingredients

• ½ ring smoked sausage
• 1 – 15 oz can sweet potatoes in syrup
• 1 large apple, cut into ¾” chunks
• 1 Tbsp flour

Directions

• Slice sausage into ¼ inch coins
• Put sausage in skillet and begin heating over medium heat
• When sausage begins to brown, flip sausage coins and add apple
• When both sides of the sausage are browned, add sweet potatoes and the syrup they're canned in
• Once the liquid begins to boil, add flour and stir in
• Continue heating until liquid has thickened to a gravy, then remove from heat and serve.

#recipe #main #skillet

Shall we have a laugh and raise a toast as blood for whine betrays its host?

When talk churns cheap and morals fray how easy truths careen and sway.

Prey knot the wiles of antinomian fume. Instead sweep doubts with unfurled broom.

Aghast, each scripture baits to jar when sheep are led to maim and scar.

© 2026 AnOublietteofThought. All rights reserved.

Steeds meer mensen overlijden door Plasticide.

In Smægmå komen meer en meer mensen in de problemen door een scala aan problemen veroorzaakt door algemene aanschaf overdaad. Bij een onderzoek uitgevoerd door onderzoeksbureau Aangelijnde Nationale Welzijns Bank {ANWB} bleek dat het aantal sterfgevallen door Plasticide de afgelopen vijf jaar flink is toegenomen. Plasticide is doodsoorzaak nummer één bij net gescheiden alleenstaande papegaaien en aquarium bezitters met een stemmingsstoornis tussen de 30 en 35 jaar, vijf jaar geleden overleed nog niemand uit die categorie aan deze kwaal, niet alleen omdat deze toen nog niet officieel was benoemd door doktoren met een passie voor ontdekken van kwalen en deze dan officieel labelen als zijnde een ziekte maar ook omdat deze categorie nog niet officieel was opgenomen als categorie bij het centraal bureau bevolking statistiek.

Gelukkig zijn ze daar tot diepere inzichten gekomen waardoor we nu iedere dag meer komen te weten over iedere groep die het bureau officieel heeft onderscheiden van de andere grotere groep normale gezonde mensen. Deze groep is zelfs inmiddels ook een steeds beperktere groep. Op dit moment is nog maar twee procent van heel Smægmå normaal gezond, dit aangezien onze veel wetende over alles in en om ons doktoren steeds meer afwijkingen weten te vinden. Inmiddels zijn het vooral artsen die als enigsten nog binnen de afgetekende welzijn lijntjes passen. Waarschijnlijk ook omdat zij degenen zijn die het ongezond zijn het meeste vrezen want dan zullen ze onder behandeling komen van hun vrienden, collega's en dat willen ze liever niet aangezien zij net wat meer weten over de ware aard van het trek en duw gezondheidswerk.

Plasticide is het ineens overlijden door een overdosis aan bestelde en ontvangen pakketjes in zeer korte tijd. Het zoeken, uitpakken, als ook wachten op de cadeaus, de hele, lange dagen tracken en tracen, zorgt voor zoveel mentale en fysieke spanningen dat de veroorzaker daarvan, de koper, pardoes om het leven komt. Meestal bij het uitpakken van een geschenk maar soms ook net ervoor bij het openen van de deur voor de bezorger of tijdens het bestel proces, maar liefst 5 procent van de Plasticide slachtoffers overlijdt tijden de Weerozeero betaling. De Weerozeero groep wil trouwens niet reageren op vragen gesteld door het artsen collectief. Deze betichten de groep van het opzettelijk veroorzaken van enorm betaalgemak waardoor deze toch al uitzonderlijk kwetsbare groep der groot pakketjes bestellers geneigd is tot een overdaad. Aldus de artsen, geneeskrachtige managers, is er een memo in omloop waarin staat dat de bende achter Weerozeero mensen met opzet zo ver wil krijgen dat ze een ongezonde dosis cadeaus en dergelijke boodschappen bestellen, liefst overal en nergens, op elk tijdstip van de dag. Dit vooral omdat zij heel veel meer baat hebben bij een overspannen economische toestand in het hele land dan de mensen thuis, die waarschijnlijk liever niks of bijna niks willen willen maar juist die kalme toestand niet meer kunnen bereiken door de aanwezigheid van driftig handelende, adverterende, mailende, flyerende, reclame filmpjes producerende, advertentie plaatsende en andere vormen van duiden op 1001 zeldzame beste koopkansjes, de eeuwig alles roepende winkeliers en hun bijbehorende ketens. Deze memo bestaat volgens de Weerozeero groep niet, maar is enkel een gerucht aangemaakt door ernstig geradicaliseerde uiterst linkse groepen anti-kapitalisten.

Ondanks deze doldwaze ritjes in de grote geruchten malle molen blijft het feit staan dat er alleen dit jaar al vijftig mensen zijn omgekomen door een overdosis aan pakketjes in korte tijd. Het aantal [zelf] geschenken dat gevaar op levert voor de volksgezondheid is om en nabij de 50 per week, zeker drie weken lang, mensen lopen dan een veel groter risico op hard falen en missie lukken van de bloedsomloop, tevens zorgt het voor ernstige psychische klachten zoals derepressie en afhankelijkheid van postbezorger problematiek, natuurlijk is er ook grote kans op zware schulden last overal en nergens. Eenmaal over de normale kooplijn van ongeveer 2 á 3 pakketjes per week naar vijftig is er al vaak grote schade op het koop immuun systeem bij dergelijke labiele mensen.

Artsen willen aan de hand van het rapport en de daaropvolgende Plasticide campagne overheden en mensen wijzen op het grote gevaar van dergelijk gedrag. Weliswaar vinden zij dat het toch vooral de verantwoording is voor de koper zelf om zijn aangelijnde bestel gedrag te normaliseren om problemen zoals Plasticide maar ook Karton deficiëntie en Bubbelplastic contaminatie te voorkomen. Maar het is dan natuurlijk wel noodzakelijk dat mensen zich bewust worden van de risico's die zij lopen als ze inloggen op hun persoonlijke winkel account en meer en meer willen willen zoals winkels en hun ketens graag willen dat zij veel willen omdat dit zo goed is voor de economie van voornamelijk Åzcyå, de inkopers eruit, luchtvaart- en transportmaatschappijen, brandstof voor die voertuigen leveranciers, miljoenen marketeers en daarnaast van computer e.d. Apparaten verkopers en daaraan verbonden grote nog meer energie slurpende data centrales, zij die de schijven leveren en draaiende houden waarop al die artikel plaatjes en lovende teksten staan met hun bijpassende kunstmatig super pientere schommelende (maar niet teveel) prijskaartjes, want kunstmatig pienter heeft zo zijn vooraf ingestelde grenzen waar binnen een prijs mag schommelen, ook kunstmatige intelligentie moet hier en daar worden ingeperkt.

Vandaar dus dat wij op dit kwaliteitsblog graag onze overdaad aan zeer zinvolle preek ruimte verkopen aan dit driftig bezige veel geld dienende parate staat gezondheidscollectief. Wij willen natuurlijk ook niets liever dan gezonde mensen zo goed als mogelijk elke dag overleven in een heerlijke koop, inkoop, doorverkoop omgeving net als hier en nu in ons geweldig bijzon welvarende Smægmå.

Dit artikel werd mogelijk gemaakt door welzijnswinkel eropenover.com en geenverweerstandje bv. Het zou het kunstlicht ook niet gezien hebben zonder een flinke bak aan subsidie gelden afkomstig van het ministerie van handelsbelangen.

“MY FATHER ADRESSES ME ON THE FACTS OF OLD AGE” (2002)

Kitaptan beşinci seçimim, Grace Paley’den. Bir baba, bir masa ve evlat. Yaş alma dersleri konuşulacaktır. Hikâye şu sözlerle açılır: “My father had decided to teach me how to grow old. I said O.K.”

O masaya çoğumuz oturmuştur, çoğu zaman dayanamayıp kalkmışızdır. Dersler aralıklı olarak farklı mekânlarda hep tekrarlanır. Alamadığımız derslerin sayısı, alabildiklerimizden katça fazladır.

Oğuz Atay’ın Korkuyu Beklerken kitabında “Babama Mektup” bölümünde söylediği gibi “bütün dünyanın suratına çarpıp durmadan kapıları” (1) bir soluk alıp kulak vermek gerekebilir. Ve yaş almanın bir tarafı kesinkes melankoliktir.

Çok sevdiğim Harun Kolçak, o güzel şarkısında “Yıllar, yıllar, niye batıyor günler, hani nerede dünler, ya siz nerede bittiniz?” demektedir. Yıllar geçerken, karşımızda bir hikâye durmaktadır. İlk kroşe gelir, sağdan mı soldan mı bilinmez ama bence tam ortadandır, baba der ki:

· Dikkatin fazlasıyla dağınık,

· Değiş der, giyim-kuşam ve bakım tavsiyeleri verir,

· İnsanların gözlerinin “ta” içine bak demek ister, “Don’t squint”den bunu anlar okuyan kişi. Gözlerinin ‘ta’ içine bakmak gerçekten çok zordur, rahatsız ettiğimizi düşünürüz. Ve o gözden payımıza düşenler bizi korkutur. Baba bilir, ama bilmezlikten gelir. Derinlerde kendisinin sebep olduğu bir neden vardır ancak şöyle denir: Artık top sende, kroşe gelmiştir bir kere; hadi bakalım, topu şimdi nereye atacaksın?

****

“TAKE YOUR HEART IN YOUR TWO HANDS”

· Sabırlı ol ve her sabah kalktığında, “kalbini” iki elinin avuçlarına al der,

“When you get up in the morning you must take your heart in your two hands. You must do this every morning.” (572)

· Sakince ve yumuşak konuş, bağırma, her şeyi söyleyebilirsin ama ‘saygılı’ ol der:

“Heart, little heart, beat softly but never forget your job, the blood. You can also whisper also, Remember, Remember.” (…)

“O little heart, you worked like a bastard, like a dog, like a crazy slave, bang, bang, bang that day, remember?” (572)

· Çocuklar der, milyon yıl geçse seni unutmazlar— nasıl hissettirdiğini,

· Kendi inanç sistemi içinde din hakkında bir şeyler söylemeye çalışır, bu konuda konuşmak hep zordur. Yalnızca şunu söylemekle yetinir: Neyi yaptığın, yapmadığın, nelerden vazgeçtiğin, kime hakaret ettiğin, rencide ettiğin, ihanet ettiğin, bunlar bilinir.

· Zor zamanda, birinin yanında olmak çok önemlidir der. Özellikle sevdiklerinin. “Bir taş gibi” o insanın aklında kalır:

“Do you remember, you didn’t go see your aunt, she was dying? That will be on your mind like a stone.” (573)

· Tutuklanma hikâyesini anlatır ve annesinin gözlerine baktıktan sonraki kararında; hiçbir şeyin çok fazlası iyi değil der: Bu bir ideoloji, bu bir yemek de olabilir, yeşillik bile olsa.

“HA HA HA, TOMORROW WILL COME”

· Yatırım işlerinden der, evlat! Uzak dur. Evlat sorar, herkes milyoner oluyor, çok çok paralar kazanıyor, baba sorar:

“But what of tomorrow?” he asked.

“Tomorrow, I said, they’ll make another million.”

“No, no, no, I mean TOMORROW. I was there when TOMORROW came in 1929. So, I say to them and their millions, HA HA HA, TOMORROW will come. Go home now, I have a great deal more to tell you. Somehow, I’m always tired.” (574)

Babanın Büyük Buhran’a referans verdiği anlaşılır, (yani bu yazıyı yazan kişi) öyle anlamıştır.

****

Kızı, eşiyle boşanma sürecinde olduğunu söyler babasına. Evleri ayırma ya da tamamen boşanma seçenekler arasındadır. Geleneksellik her yerde vardır, baba gidebildiği yere kadar sürdür, artık olmuyorsa ondan sonra bağları kopart der: En sonunda ikiniz de ayrı huzurevine çıkarsınız der, e tabii şaka yapmaktadır. Mizah hep vardır, tam da böyle zamanlarda.

“You’ll see, in thirty years from now, you’ll get tired often. It doesn’t mean you’re sick. This is something important that I’m telling you. Listen. To live a long time, long years, you’ve got to sleep a certain extra percentage away. It’s a shame. (575)

****

Bugünlük ders bitmiştir ancak bir dersten öbür derse geçilir. Bu sefer işin içinde siyasi konular vardır: Baba siyaseti ve bir mutfak. Kızının göz ucuyla gördüğü, Turgenyev’in Babalar ve Oğullar kitabı. Rusya düşünülmekte ancak Rusya’nın bundan hiçbir haberi olmamaktadır. Bir babayla kavga etmeden “siyaset” konuşmak; yeteneğin ötesinde bir beceridir, baba bir anda şöyle der:

“I don’t believe he was an anti-Semite. Of course, most of them were, even if they had brains. I don’t think Gorky was, Gogol probably. Tolstoy, no, Tolstoy had an opinion about the Mexican American War. Did you know? Of course, most were anti-Semites. Dostoyevsky. It was natural, it seems. (576)

· Ne olursa olsun oku der; bunun pişmanlığı hem anne hem baba da vardır. Kendilerini siyasi meselelere kaptırmışlar ve bu şekilde daha değerli birisi olacaklarını düşünmüşlerdir.

· Sonlara doğru konu, aşka ve cinselliğe gelir. Bunların konuşulması hep zordur kapalı kapılar ardına itilir ama söylediklerinin sonunda, bir şeylerin hep bittiğini ima eder ve şu cümle dökülür:

“Then one day in the morning she comes to me, my wife. She shows me a spot over her left breast. I know right away. I don’t touch it. I see it. In my mind I turn it this way and that. But I know in that minute, in one minute, everything is finished, finished happiness, pleasure, finished, finished, years ahead black. (578)

· Bu nedenle der, kendine iyi bakmalısın, bir de muz: her gün bir tane, yenmeli, potasyum,

****

En son konu kardeşine gelir, Grisha’ya. Yıl 1922’yi gösterir, öncesinde Palmer Baskınları bahsi geçer. Ardından Russian Artist Club (Rusya Sanatçılar Kulübü) ve Bakunin, Emma Goldman, Berkman ve Lenin isimlerini duyarız. O dönemde, Rusya’da Yahudi toplumunun uğradığı kitlesel zulümler ve baskılardan (pogrom) bahsedilir. Kardeşinin bir sanatçı olduğunu anlarız, başına bir şeyler gelmiştir.

****

Ve babanın ağzından şu sözler dökülür:

“Don’t leave me here, take me home to die, And I didn’t. And her face looked at me that day and many, many mornings look at me still.” (579)

Bu bir (baba-oğul) hikâyesi değildir aksine ters köşedir ve siyasi bir alt metin vardır. Az da olsa daha belirgin bir şekilde bize görünür. Sonlara yaklaşılmaktadır ve baba şöyle kapatır:

“Enough, already, he said. I had the job to tell you how to take care of yourself, what to expect. About the heart- you know it was not a metaphor. But in the end a great thing, a really interesting thing, would be to find out what happened to our Grisha. You’re smart. You can do it. Also, you’ll see, you’ll be lucky in this life to have something you must do to take your mind of all the things you didn’t do. Then he said. I suppose that is something like a joke. But, my dear girl, very serious.” (579)

“Her gün kalbini, iki elinin arasına alma” düşüncesi ilham vericidir, unuttuğumuz çok olur. Bahsi geçen hikâyedeki “yaş alma derslerine” katılmadığınız yerler de mutlaka vardır. Biliriz ki dersler hiç bitmez, öğrenme hep devam eder ve yaşantı bir adım önde gider: O sesi yabana atmamak gerekebilir.

Bahsi geçen eserler:

Dipnot 1: Oğuz Atay, Korkuyu Beklerken (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2016), 180.

A CENTURY OF FICTION IN THE NEW YORKER 1925-2025 EDITED BY DEBORAH TREISMAN. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2025.

Lois Shelton’ın çektiği Grace Paley fotoğrafı, Arizona Üniversitesi, Poetry Center (VOCA) arşivinden alınmıştır.

A couple of weeks ago, I went to update my VPS. Usually, I do this once a week, sometimes more frequently depending on any security news I see. I should probably have the AI agents I use do this, but I do it myself for now. I find infrastructure interesting and “boring” in a good way most of the time.

While updating one of my VPSes, I got a message saying I needed to pay for access to Caddy because the repository had reached its bandwidth limit. This was from a company called Cloudsmith. I wasn't the only one getting this message, either. There was already a large discussion going on over at Caddy's GitHub.

This led me down a big rabbit hole that lasted quite a few hours, and I'm still thinking about it. My first thought wasn't about the bandwidth limit itself, but whether this could be a new type of attack. Caddy is open source and free, and it's used by a lot of people, organizations, and companies. We've seen several different supply chain attacks over the years. But what if someone deliberately flooded the repositories of open-source projects and used up their free bandwidth allowances? People wouldn't be able to download security updates, leaving older, bug-ridden versions of the software running and potentially vulnerable to exploitation.

Before anyone says not to give people ideas, I'm sure someone has already thought of this. It's kind of a modern-day denial-of-service attack, just from a different angle.

As it turned out, Caddy's repository had exhausted its 4.9 TB monthly bandwidth allowance. Apparently, much of the traffic came from automated systems repeatedly downloading packages. Some IP addresses had reportedly made hundreds of thousands of requests. That's a lot of bandwidth for a free open-source project to deal with.

Luckily, there was no indication this was a deliberate attack, so my aluminum foil hat could come off. By the end of the weekend, someone at Cloudsmith had fixed the bandwidth limit problem, and everyone could update again.

What I found encouraging was that several other providers contacted the maintainer and offered to help. I'm not sure if any of those offers were accepted, but it was good to see people stepping up to help keep a free project running.

And that's something I appreciate about open source. Projects like Caddy and Traefik are useful to a lot of people, including me, and much of the work behind them is done by people who aren't getting rich from it. Meanwhile, we have hardware manufacturers shifting supply toward their most profitable customers while the rest of us deal with higher prices and fewer choices.

It's quite a contrast. On one side, companies making hardware harder and more expensive for ordinary people to get. On the other, people putting their time and effort into making software that anyone can use, often for little or no rewards and riches.

I'm glad there are still people willing to do that for the greater good of the internet.

#caddy #selfhosting #technology

Let's think about something for one minute.

If James Talarico was the Bible-believing Christian he wants us to think he is, the Left wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole, let alone fawn over him and pour millions of dollars into getting him elected.

Seriously. They think you're stupid. Resist.

#politics

This October has been an expensive one. First, our hot water heater went out. It was probably about 10 years old. Then, two days after our water heater went out, the refrigerator went out, and it was also about 10 years old. Fixing it would cost more than buying a new one. So off to Home Depot we went, and $1,900 later, we had a nice new refrigerator with a five-year warranty. It's bigger than the old one but more energy-efficient, and it has LED lighting, which is very bright.

Ten years for both appliances. That seems to be the norm now, though I would like to go back to the days when appliances lasted 20–30 years or more.

Speaking of appliances and household gadgets, can we get just a plain-Jane dumb TV? Nothing smart, just a TV where we can plug in a stick or a small box like an Apple TV, Fire TV, or Google TV. The dumb TV just needs a nice picture, good sound, and a digital tuner. I don't need smarts built into the TV. I would rather have those features separate so they're easier to upgrade and maintain, and cheaper in the long run.

This has been quite a year for major hardware purchases, both for computers and home appliances. Hopefully, that's it. One thing I don't want right now is any more hard drive or RAM problems, as computer hardware is almost as expensive as kitchen appliances.

There have been enough unexpected expenses this year, including a dead hard drive that, ironically, was over 10 years old. So this year, all the 10s died.

Praying that's it for the next few years when it comes to expensive household appliances or much-needed computer equipment.

#hardware #personal #technology

So many dreams, all day long. I slept all day long. My old friend, Julius was in one of them. Him and a guy that I’ve met in real life but… was not Boyfriend, someone familiar. We were all matching somewhat and wearing similar colours. When I pointed it out, one of them mentioned about taking a picture to capture the moment. So I did. Was Garfield somehow involved? There was also a scene with a handful of my batch-mates from high school were about to go to jail. I don’t remember what for, but I was giving them hugs before it morphed into another part of the dream. At some point, I was in a dream where Ethan Klein was hitting on me and trying to make me his side-piece. Ew, I know. I had just been watching a video about the whole ordeal so I think it was fresh in my mind. There was also, as part of a ceremony, where I was helping a kid and his dad unfurl a flag that was tangled. They were going to be walking down towards the stage as part of a parade (I was a close family friend or I think teacher of the child) but the flag kept being tangled up. I told them to walk slower and that we’ll get it. They just need to trust me and wait. We eventually did and all was well.

---

Since my friend L found a printer I’ve been printing out old writings. I moved away from my dependency on LiveJournal, to this site called “Write Together”–does anyone remember that? It encouraged me to write again, and quite verbosely.

In this return to writing, I feel the challenge of finding the thoughts. Focusing and creating a unity. Even though I meditate, the mind, when trying to write feels scattered. It’s definitely gotten better since I limited my YouTube rabbit holes, but it’s a new writing era once again. I want to keep reading and refraining from digital dependency in every moment. Must I bring my phone everywhere? Must I scroll through YouTube before bed? Can’t I pick a book and stick to it? The reason for all my dreams for example, was that I fell asleep with YouTube playing in the background. I think it affected my dreams and consciousness. I’m glad that I remembered it though. That’s a sure sign that I am allowing for my body to feel spaciousness and pause.

#writing #daily #dreams

Don't tell me what someone said. Tell me what their words made you think. Don't list books you've read or classes you've attended. Tell me how they changed you. What did you gather from them? Don't tell me where you've traveled and who you've dealt with. Tell me why. Tell me how. Tell me where you failed and why you think you did.

Tell me something about three people you notice each day on your normal routes. Three people who you only recognize in passing. Tell me about the animals along those paths. Are any pregnant? Do any have young children? Are any wounded? Tell me about the plants. Tell me about the buildings. Tell me about the shifting scents.

I don't want to hear about other persons' thoughts and life experiences as a reference to your own. I want to hear where your path causes your feet to ache. I want to hear what has crawled under your skin and taken up residence. I care not for the superficial mask placed on parade for the world to approve. I care about the guts, the fear, the hopes, and the dreams. I want to know what really makes you tick, and what you're afraid to let tock.

I want to know you — naked, beautiful, grotesque, strong, vulnerable you. Not who your parents attempted to mold you into. Not who society told you that you should be. Not who life demanded you become.

You. Simply, complicated, unobscured you.

Everything else is just window dressing, and I prefer to shop for keeps.

© 2026 AnOublietteofThought. All rights reserved.

Not edited nor proofread.