Eric J. Korpela @SETIEric@qoto.org

There was Paul Manafort, and we'll come back to Paul Manafort, but the important thing about Paul Manafort is that he had been working for Russian-backed oligarchs for years in Ukraine and had gotten enormously wealthy off of it.

Because he is a convicted felon, Trump will most likely lose liquor license for Bedminster and his other properties in New Jersey. — Slowly but surely, the universe is going to connect fuck around with find out.

This is the script of my national radio report yesterday on the controversy regarding Adobe's Terms of Service changes. As always, this script may have a few minor word variations from how I presented it live on air.

- - -

So I think it's probably true that most people who use modern computers these days are likely to interact sometimes with Adobe technologies one way or another. The PDF document format traces back to Adobe in the early 90s. Photoshop is from Adobe, which really has become something of a verb as in "photoshopping an image", and goes back to the late 80's. And there are lots of other graphics and video and more where Adobe dominates the creative pipelines.

And what's happened with Adobe like with so many other firms is that they've moved from a model where you buy the software and install it on your computer and that's all you usually pay, to these "running in the cloud" models where you have to pay ongoing subscription fees for access. From a corporate profit center standpoint the attraction of the subscription model is obvious, but this hasn't always gone over well with users.

Now of course these cloud and subscription models almost always have Terms of Service agreements that users have to accept before they can use the services. And it seems commonly *accepted* that most people don't really read these in depth and of those who do most don't have the background to completely understand them given the dense legalese they're usually written in.

So what's happened with Adobe is very recently they changed their terms of service and apparently asked users to accept the new terms. And even though the changes may be *relatively* minor, the fact that they made changes drew attention to the terms of service for many users for pretty much the first time, and they really didn't like the expansive nature of the rights Adobe gives itself to access and inspect users' content.

Now in most respects what Adobe is doing isn't all that much different from what various firms with cloud-based services are doing and have in their terms of service agreements, but as users have been increasingly pushed into these cloud-based systems rather than being able to keep these applications completely local on their own computers, and now as the complexities of AI systems and what data AI has access to has entered into the mix as well, we seem to be reaching a kind of inflection point where for many people this has just all gone too far and a "we're not going to take it" blowback is being triggered from many users.

So over the last few days the Web has been flooded with articles and YouTube videos condemning Adobe, indeed using terms like "Adobe Apocalypse", "Adobe went too far", "the end of Adobe", and so on. And while obviously there's considerable emotion in play with this, there's no denying that many people are genuinely very upset and many are saying they're ending their Adobe subscriptions and moving to competing products wherever they can, even though that can cause them considerable hassles given how widely used Adobe products are for creating and exchanging work products during the creation of so much content.

Adobe has attempted to reply to this controversy but as you might guess, this seems to have just made many users even angrier at Adobe.

So I don't know how this is going to turn out with Adobe but I think it's reasonable to view this as a pretty dramatic warning to many firms, that the kinds of subscription/cloud models and terms of service that they've been pushing users into won't necessarily be widely acceptable indefinitely, and that it only takes a single misstep and a few days for large firms like these to put at risk the good will of users that took years or even decades to accumulate.

Many of the users of these firms, especially firms that dominate in particular areas, are starting to say that they feel like they're being pushed around, and we're now seeing evidence that they're unlikely to put up with this indefinitely. It seems likely that these firms can ignore this changing landscape only at their own considerable risk in the long run, with all the complex ramifications that has going forward.

Stay tuned, this is going to be interesting!

- - -

L

New study: "Manuscripts released as #preprints before journal submission experience significantly shorter acceptance time compared to those without preprints."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-024-05056-6

PS: This should boost the incentives for authors to release preprints prior to journal submission. A win for both authors and readers.

Hi Trump.

Via Kyle Griffin:

The FBI just announced that crime has plummeted in the first quarter of 2024:

According to the report:

Murder decreased by 26.4%
Rape decreased by 25.7%
Robbery decreased by 17.8%
Aggravated assault decreased by 12.5%
Reported property crime decreased by 15.1%

#SevenYearsAgoToday #AreYouBetterOff

June 11, 2017 – Donald Trump tried to cultivate a personal relationship with a federal prosecutor, Preet Bharara, after the 2016 election. Bharara reported a sense of déjà vu listening to James Comey’s testimony regarding Trump’s bizarre interactions. Trump’s final call to Bharara, on March 9, 2017, was to “shoot the breeze,” which Bharara immediately reported to AG Jeff Sessions. He was fired the following day.

#NeverAgainTrump #TrumpMustLose2024 #VoteBlue

Given Alito's disdain for precedent given his overturn of Roe, his disregard for US Constitution given his pro insurrection flag, his disregard for confidentiality given his diatribe admitting lack of impartiality—why is he still on the bench & is there any doubt he leaked Dobbs?

Two independent journalism outlets — ProPublica and Lauren Windsor — have now done more to uncover the misconduct and extremism of Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito than the ENTIRE mainstream media.

Operatives with GOP ties are helping Cornel West get on the ballot in a key state https://www.yahoo.com/news/operatives-gop-ties-helping-cornel-214540310.html

Donald Trump had 44 members of his cabinet during his presidency — his most trusted advisors, all people he handpicked and worked with closely.

40 of those 44 are now REFUSING to support Trump’s candidacy this year.

Yes, you read that correctly.

Great quote seen on The Magicians:

"Short memory is a privilege of the oppressor."

💯

#QuotesOutOfContext

If you tweeted “Today is 1776” the morning of January 6th and then live-tweeted the movements of the Speaker of the House as the insurrection unfolded, you need to be removed from office and prosecuted for sedition against the United States of America.

NEXT ELECTION: June 25, 2024

#LaurenBoebert #LaurenGropert #GOPIdiots #Colorado #NeverAgainBoebert #VoteBlueToSaveDemocracy #BlahBlahBoebert #VoteBoebertOut2024

So let me see if I have this straight: A convicted criminal, who's surrounded himself with other convicted criminals, is running on a platform of championing the interests of convicted Jan. 6 criminals? https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-finds-new-ways-praise-celebrate-jan-6-rioters-rcna156294

@pluralistic
Your 16yo daughter needs to learn that nazis are to be ridiculed as often as possible. Especially Illinois nazis.

@pluralistic “I hate Illinois Nazis!” As true today as it was then.

Tickets for Trump’s private fundraiser with the Beverly Hills elite started at $5,000.

A photo with Trump cost $40,000.

Roundtable seating was $100,000.

Becoming an event chair cost $250,000.

It's clear who Trump works for — and it sure as hell isn't the working class.

@claysand

the entire point of laws from a conservative point of view is to punish those they want to punish

you are referring to hypocrisy. but there is no hypocrisy nor shame from the conservative point of view

for conservatives there is merely an ingroup, and an outgroup

and the law exists to punish the outgroup. period

they genuinely believe this and see no problem with this, and they do not care about every point you raise, which is from the point of view of genuine morality

Why does anyone give a shit what this thing has to say?

https://www.macrumors.com/2024/06/10/elon-musk-threatens-to-ban-apple-devices/