Dan Ariely and Francesca Gino are two of the biggest stars in behavioral science. Both have conducted blockbuster research into how to make people more honest, research we've highlighted on Planet Money. The two worked together on a paper about how to "nudge" people to be more honest on things like forms or tax returns. Their trick: move the location where people attest that they have filled in a form honestly from the bottom of the form to the top.
But recently, questions have arisen about whether the data Ariely and Gino relied on in their famous paper about honesty were fabricated — whether their research into honesty was itself built on lies. The blog Data Colada went looking for clues in the cells of the studies' Excel spreadsheets, the shapes of their data distributions, and even the fonts that were used.
The Hartford, an insurance company that collaborated with Ariely on one implicated study, told NPR this week in a statement that it could confirm that the data it had provided for that study had been altered had been altered after they gave it to Ariely, but prior to the research's publication: "It is clear the data was manipulated inappropriately and supplemented by synthesized or fabricated data."
Ariely denies that he was responsible for the falsified data. "Getting the data file was the extent of my involvement with the data," he told NPR.
by Jeremy Schwartz, The Texas Tribune and ProPublica
Legislation that would require purchasing the kits is facing key opposition after ProPublica and The Texas Tribune found no evidence that they’d ever been used to find a missing child. The probe previously spurred Texas to strip millions in funding.
State Sen. John Whitmire, first elected in 1982, and U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, in office since 1995, could be vacating seats that haven’t been open for decades. The election calendar, however, may bring a tough decision for one or both.
We continue to see the potential of a system developing in the open Atlantic heading into next week, but it will likely struggle through Monday or Tuesday and no land is threatened by this system.
Happening now: Tropical wave in the Atlantic no better organized today
Today’s National Hurricane Center outlook shows the wave in the Atlantic as having 60 percent odds of developing now, up from 40 percent yesterday.
Odds of development in the Atlantic are up to about 60 percent today as a disorganized tropical wave makes a go at things heading into next week. (NHC)
We are still a couple days away from this happening. If you look at satellite this morning, well, it’s not exactly organized, although it’s a lot more active looking than it has been the last couple days.
The Atlantic wave is disorganized this morning, but it has much more thunderstorm activity associated with it than it has the last couple mornings. It’s slowly working toward development. (Weathernerds.org)
Over the next 2 to 3 days, this wave should slowly organize. It will continue west-northwest and eventually turn more northwest and then north before getting to the islands. One very significant inhibiting factor for this system will likely be wind shear, which is extremely strong ahead of the wave and is expected to remain strong into this weekend.
The Atlantic system is expected to deal with good amounts of wind shear over the next 3 to 4 days (Saturday’s forecast shown here) which should stunt its growth to some extent. Shear may finally relax some next week, giving it space to grow. (Tropical Tidbits)
Wind shear will probably act to limit the system’s initial development through Monday. By the time the shear relaxes, the disturbance should be comfortably out at sea and away from land.
In summary, very, very slow organization is possible through Monday, but the wave will also begin to turn out to sea so that when it does have breathing room to possibly organize further it will be safely away from land.
Elsewhere, the NHC did re-tag the old Invest 95L in the far western Caribbean (heading toward the Pacific) and the upper level disturbance near Florida again this morning, but odds of any development are near zero at this time.
The medium range (days 6 to 10): Nothing new
For now, everything seems quiet looking next week. We’ll watch to see that open Atlantic wave likely turn north and northeast out to sea. Aside from that one system, there’s nothing we see on our radar that has much potential. We’re likely entering a brief period of calm now.
Fantasyland (beyond day 10): The calm before the storms, maybe
We start to scour the ensemble members this time of year for hints of activity. Remember that ensembles are just models run roughly 30 (GFS) to 50 (Euro) different times with initialization tweaks to give us a realistic spread in outcomes. As a meteorologist, you’re looking for any sort of hint of activity within that spread to try to hone in on something. We see nothing notable right now. As noted in yesterday’s post, we do expect things to pick up some around the 10th or so of August. That thinking has not changed.
We may post briefly to update the Atlantic system this weekend. On Monday, we’ll update the status of the season to date and talk more about early August.
Connecting with us!
We are grateful to the readers who have added us to their repertoire each day! We continue to grow, and with no advertising budget, we rely on our readers to spread the word. Thank you to those that do! We just want to remind you that we’re all over social media. We’re trying our hardest to reach people where they are, and that’s why we have a bunch of accounts. Check us out and give us a follow on your favorite platform.
We continue to slip back into drought across the Houston area, and all of Texas for that matter. Since last week’s update, the report issued on Thursday showed drought expand to cover over 35 percent of the Houston region, up 5.5 percent since a week ago. Meanwhile, severe drought has arrived for eastern parts of the metro area into Liberty and Chambers Counties.
Drought now covers over a third of the Houston region, with the worst of it being east and south of the city. (US Drought Monitor)
Texas as a whole is seeing severe drought grow, up to almost 20 percent of the state now, up from about 6 percent a month ago. We’ve fortunately had some downpours pepper parts of the area this week, but it’s not even close to what we need to start reversing this process. We’re far off, and the upcoming weather pattern seems to suggest we are not getting any closer to resolution.
Today
More of the same. Look for high temperatures in the upper-90s and a few cooling showers here or there that you can thank your lucky stars, should you receive one.
Weekend
Hot! Rain chances drop from a paltry 15 percent or so on Friday to 10 to 15 percent on Saturday and 5 to 10 percent on Sunday. And even those values may be somewhat generous. Look for heat index values to tick upward into mid-100s again, possibly back to borderline heat advisory levels by Sunday afternoon. High temperatures will be in the upper-90s on Saturday and near 100 degrees Sunday and lows will be in the 70s to near 80 once again.
Next week’s heat
So if you follow the animating map below, you’ll see what’s happening next week. High pressure, or the core of the heat is established over the Southwest today. By Sunday, it will focus over Colorado, and by Tuesday, it’s centered right over Oklahoma and North Texas.
High pressure, the core of the heat, will drift into Texas next week before retreating back to the Southwest next weekend. However, because it is likely to strengthen significantly again, it may not lead to much cooling for Texas when it shifts back to our west. (Tropical Tidbits)
This means that the core of the heat will follow. We’re in for it next week, folks. No way to sugar coat this.
Some of the hottest temperatures of summer settle over us next week. (Weather Bell)
Models have generally been running too hot in terms of temperature this summer, but we’ve more than made up for it with humidity. Regardless, expect a string of heat advisories pretty much every day next week, with highs generally 99 to 102°, high humidity, and morning lows around 80 or so. It may not *feel* quite as bad as what we saw in June and earlier this month, but it won’t be off by much.
The high pressure ridging that focuses the heat may retreat back to the Southwest by next weekend, which should hopefully allow for just basic summer heat instead of the next level stuff we get next week. But I will say that some models are hinting that as the ridge pulls back to the Southwest it will strengthen further (yesterday’s 12z GFS model had the strongest modeled ridge I’ve seen on a model in my entire career). You can see that on the above animation. While extreme heat would stay to our west in that scenario, it may mean that we continue predominantly near 100 and mostly dry into the first full week of August. We shall see, but I see no reason to think any significant change will occur in Houston anytime soon.
So what of rain chances? Not great. We max out today and maybe next Saturday around 15 or so percent. That’s about the best we can muster right now, and even that may be a little generous. We know some folks, especially those that are in farming are hurting and need rain. We wish we had better news.
The Judd Foundation recently announced the launch of a searchable online catalog of Donald Judd’s central library in Marfa, Texas.
Last year, the Foundation updated its website with resources documenting the life of Donald Judd. That multi-year project was spearheaded by Rainer Judd, president of the Judd Foundation and Donald Judd’s daughter. Also last year, the Foundation received a $60,000 grant from the Carl & Marilynn Thoma Foundation to digitize the library.
According to the Judd Foundation Library website, Mr. Judd began acquiring books when he was a student at the College of William and Mary. He continued to add to his collection throughout his studies at the Art Students League and Columbia University. During his time at Columbia, Mr. Judd worked at the college’s library. Throughout his life, he continued to collect books in line with his various interests.
Currently, Mr. Judd’s books are dispersed across multiple locations, including his studio (101 Spring Street in New York City), La Mansana de Chinati/The Block in Marfa, and his ranch houses in Presidio County: Casa Morales, Casa Perez, and Las Casas. The new online catalog of Mr. Judd’s library includes over 13,000 volumes from the artist’s personal collection located at La Mansana de Chinati/The Block.
The Judd Foundation online library catalog
The books cover a wide range of topics such as art, architecture, philosophy, literature, anthropology, natural history, and world history. The catalog features a visual map of bookshelves in the library, and when a shelf is clicked, the site displays a photograph of the actual shelf. The bookshelves, built by local craftsmen, were designed by Mr. Judd in response to the dimensions of the room.
Elon Musk lies a lot. He lies about being a "utopian socialist." He lies about being a "free speech absolutist." He lies about which companies he founded:
He lies about really stupid stuff, like claiming that comsats that share the same spectrum will deliver steady broadband speeds as they add more users who each get a narrower slice of that spectrum:
The fundamental laws of physics don't care about this bullshit, but people do. The comsat lie convinced a bunch of people that pulling fiber to all our homes is literally impossible – as though the electrical and phone lines that come to our homes now were installed by an ancient, lost civilization. Pulling new cabling isn't a mysterious art, like embalming pharaohs. We do it all the time. One of the poorest places in America installed universal fiber with a mule named "Ole Bub":
Previous tech barons had "reality distortion fields," but Musk just blithely contradicts himself and pretends he isn't doing so, like a budget Steve Jobs. There's an entire site devoted to cataloging Musk's public lies:
But while Musk lacks the charm of earlier Silicon Valley grifters, he's much better than they ever were at running a long con. For years, he's been promising "full self driving…next year."
Tesla is a giant shell-game masquerading as a car company. The important thing about Tesla isn't its cars, it's Tesla's business arrangement, the Tesla-Financial Complex:
Once you start unpacking Tesla's balance sheets, you start to realize how much the company depends on government subsidies and tax-breaks, combined with selling carbon credits that make huge, planet-destroying SUVs possible, under the pretense that this is somehow good for the environment:
That valuation represents a bet on Tesla's ability to extract ever-higher rents from its customers. Take Tesla's batteries: you pay for the battery when you buy your car, but you don't own that battery. You have to rent the right to use its full capacity, with Tesla reserving the right to reduce how far you go on a charge based on your willingness to pay:
That's just one of the many rent-a-features that Tesla drivers have to shell out for. You don't own your car at all: when you sell it as a used vehicle, Tesla strips out these features you paid for and makes the next driver pay again, reducing the value of your used car and transfering it to Tesla's shareholders:
To maintain this rent-extraction racket, Tesla uses DRM that makes it a felony to alter your own car's software without Tesla's permission. This is the root of all autoenshittification:
This is technofeudalism. Whereas capitalists seek profits (income from selling things), feudalists seek rents (income from owning the things other people use). If Tesla were a capitalist enterprise, then entrepreneurs could enter the market and sell mods that let you unlock the functionality in your own car:
But because Tesla is a feudal enterprise, capitalists must first secure permission from the lord, Elon Musk, who decides which companies are allowed to compete with him, and how.
Once a company owns the right to decide which software you can run, there's no limit to the ways it can extract rent from you. Blocking you from changing your device's software lets a company run overt scams on you. For example, they can block you from getting your car independently repaired with third-party parts.
But they can also screw you in sneaky ways. Once a device has DRM on it, Section 1201 of the DMCA makes it a felony to bypass that DRM, even for legitimate purposes. That means that your DRM-locked device can spy on you, and because no one is allowed to explore how that surveillance works, the manufacturer can be incredibly sloppy with all the personal info they gather:
All kinds of hidden anti-features can lurk in your DRM-locked car, protected from discovery, analysis and criticism by the illegality of bypassing the DRM. For example, Teslas have a hidden feature that lets them lock out their owners and summon a repo man to drive them away if you have a dispute about a late payment:
DRM is a gun on the mantlepiece in Act I, and by Act III, it goes off, revealing some kind of ugly and often dangerous scam. Remember Dieselgate? Volkswagen created a line of demon-haunted cars: if they thought they were being scrutinized (by regulators measuring their emissions), they switched into a mode that traded performance for low emissions. But when they believed themselves to be unobserved, they reversed this, emitting deadly levels of NOX but delivering superior mileage.
The conversion of the VW diesel fleet into mobile gas-chambers wouldn't have been possible without DRM. DRM adds a layer of serious criminal jeopardy to anyone attempting to reverse-engineer and study any device, from a phone to a car. DRM let Apple claim to be a champion of its users' privacy even as it spied on them from asshole to appetite:
Now, Tesla is having its own Dieselgate scandal. A stunning investigation by Steve Stecklow and Norihiko Shirouzu for Reuters reveals how Tesla was able to create its own demon-haunted car, which systematically deceived drivers about its driving range, and the increasingly desperate measures the company turned to as customers discovered the ruse:
The root of the deception is very simple: Tesla mis-sells its cars by falsely claiming ranges that those cars can't attain. Every person who ever bought a Tesla was defrauded.
But this fraud would be easy to detect. If you bought a Tesla rated for 353 miles on a charge, but the dashboard range predictor told you that your fully charged car could only go 150 miles, you'd immediately figure something was up. So your Tesla tells another lie: the range predictor tells you that you can go 353 miles.
But again, if the car continued to tell you it has 203 miles of range when it was about to run out of charge, you'd figure something was up pretty quick – like, the first time your car ran out of battery while the dashboard cheerily informed you that you had 203 miles of range left.
So Teslas tell a third lie: when the battery charge reached about 50%, the fake range is replaced with the real one. That way, drivers aren't getting mass-stranded by the roadside, and the scam can continue.
But there's a new problem: drivers whose cars are rated for 353 miles but can't go anything like that far on a full charge naturally assume that something is wrong with their cars, so they start calling Tesla service and asking to have the car checked over.
This creates a problem for Tesla: those service calls can cost the company $1,000, and of course, there's nothing wrong with the car. It's performing exactly as designed. So Tesla created its boldest fraud yet: a boiler-room full of anti-salespeople charged with convincing people that their cars weren't broken.
This new unit – the "diversion team" – was headquartered in a Nevada satellite office, which was equipped with a metal xylophone that would be rung in triumph every time a Tesla owner was successfully conned into thinking that their car wasn't defrauding them.
When a Tesla owner called this boiler room, the diverter would run remote diagnostics on their car, then pronounce it fine, and chide the driver for having energy-hungry driving habits (shades of Steve Jobs's "You're holding it wrong"):
The drivers who called the Diversion Team weren't just lied to, they were also punished. The Tesla app was silently altered so that anyone who filed a complaint about their car's range was no longer able to book a service appointment for any reason. If their car malfunctioned, they'd have to request a callback, which could take several days.
Meanwhile, the diverters on the diversion team were instructed not to inform drivers if the remote diagnostics they performed detected any other defects in the cars.
The diversion team had a 750 complaint/week quota: to juke this stat, diverters would close the case for any driver who failed to answer the phone when they were eventually called back. The center received 2,000+ calls every week. Diverters were ordered to keep calls to five minutes or less.
Eventually, diverters were ordered to cease performing any remote diagnostics on drivers' cars: a source told Reuters that "Thousands of customers were told there is nothing wrong with their car" without any diagnostics being performed.
Predicting EV range is an inexact science as many factors can affect battery life, notably whether a journey is uphill or downhill. Every EV automaker has to come up with a figure that represents some kind of best guess under a mix of conditions. But while other manufacturers err on the side of caution, Tesla has the most inaccurate mileage estimates in the industry, double the industry average.
Other countries' regulators have taken note. In Korea, Tesla was fined millions and Elon Musk was personally required to state that he had deceived Tesla buyers. The Korean regulator found that the true range of Teslas under normal winter conditions was less than half of the claimed range.
Now, many companies have been run by malignant narcissists who lied compulsively – think of Thomas Edison, archnemesis of Nikola Tesla himself. The difference here isn't merely that Musk is a deeply unfit monster of a human being – but rather, that DRM allows him to defraud his customers behind a state-enforced opaque veil. The digital computers at the heart of a Tesla aren't just demons haunting the car, changing its performance based on whether it believes it is being observed – they also allow Musk to invoke the power of the US government to felonize anyone who tries to peer into the black box where he commits his frauds.
#5yrsago Ghanaian parliament erupts into giggles as MPs learn about towns called “Vagina is Wise,” “Penis is a Fool” and “Testicles are Sad” https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-44982570
"Chokepoint Capitalism: How to Beat Big Tech, Tame Big Content, and Get Artists Paid, with Rebecca Giblin", on how to unrig the markets for creative labor, Beacon Press/Scribe 2022 https://chokepointcapitalism.com
"Attack Surface": The third Little Brother novel, a standalone technothriller for adults. The Washington Post called it "a political cyberthriller, vigorous, bold and savvy about the limits of revolution and resistance." Order signed, personalized copies from Dark Delicacies https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1840/Available_Now%3A_Attack_Surface.html
The Internet Con: A nonfiction book about interoperability and Big Tech, Verso, September 2023
The Lost Cause: a post-Green New Deal eco-topian novel about truth and reconciliation with white nationalist militias, Tor Books, November 2023
This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.
Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.
31 years ago Tetris Max for the Macintosh was born, an improved clone of tetris, and it became an insanely popular Mac game during the 1990s. I may or may not have had some involvement in its development. (See lots more Tetris Max history.) Macintosh System 6 was the current OS version at the time of the game’s release, but System 7 was introduced shortly afterwards. It’s recently come to my attention that the final version of Tetris Max (v2.9.1) may not work when running System 6 on certain Mac hardware, even though the game was advertised as System 6 compatible. I haven’t yet been able to fully verify this myself, but there’s a Macintosh Garden bug report from ironboy36 in 2022, and more recently a detailed bug report complete with video (thank you James!) Obviously I need to fix this stuff ASAP – 31-year-old bug be damned. And I need your help! Consider this a group debugging effort.
Both bug reports mention an “Unimplemented Trap” error message, which probably means Tetris Max tried to call a Toolbox function that’s only available in System 7 or later, and isn’t available from System 6. I suspect this bug only applies to color-capable 68K Macintosh models running System 6, because Tetris Max 2.9 works OK under System 6.0.8 on my B&W-only Macintosh SE. That limits the range of Mac models where this problem might appear to the Macintosh II family (including the Mac SE/30), because later Mac models can’t run System 6 anyway, and earlier models (like the Mac Plus and original SE) aren’t color-capable.
James’ test was performed on a Mac SE/30 with the built-in black-and-white screen, running System 6.0.8 loaded from a BMOW Floppy Emu disk emulator. I think he was also using a Mac ROM-inator II replacement ROM during this test. Ironboy36 didn’t mention what hardware was used, so we can only guess.
Reproduction
Challenge #1 is simply reproducing the bug. Unfortunately I think this needs to be done on real hardware, and not under emulation, because I’m not aware of any software that can emulate a color-capable 68K Macintosh running System 6. Mini vMac only emulates non-color Macs like the Plus and SE. Basilisk II can’t handle 24-bit addressing or System 6, and Sheepshaver is PowerPC-only emulation. There’s MESS, but I’m not sure about its capabilities, and setting it up is daunting. [Note: I learned there’s a Macintosh II version of Mini vMac that can handle System 6, but I found it to be slightly unstable and not a reliable testing platform.]
Working on real hardware is OK, even if it’ll be more difficult, but I don’t have easy access to any appropriate machines. My SE/30 needs to be recapped and currently doesn’t boot. I also have a Mac IIci and a Mac IIsi, but one is missing the power supply and the other has an unknown motherboard problem. I can probably get one of those machines working again, but at least for now I need to rely on other people to run Tetris Max with System 6 on systems like these, and send me reports.
Other Complications and Possible Causes
I don’t remember intentionally dropping System 6 support in later versions of Tetris Max, but it’s possible. After 31 years, with no source control and no release notes, I couldn’t tell you exactly what changed between the last few versions of Tetris Max. Version 2.9.1 was the last public release from the 1990s, but the game was later patched to create a 2.9.2x version which supported running directly from a locked disk like the ROM disk provided by the Mac ROM-inator II. And before 2.9.1, there was straight version 2.9, which is the most common version found in archives today. For the purposes of troubleshooting this bug, I think all three versions behave identically.
It’s possible this is actually a Mac ROM-inator II problem, since that’s what James used and possibly ironboy36 too. It would help to try running Tetris Max on the same computer, with the same System version, with the Mac ROM-inator and then again with the stock Apple ROM. Maybe the game is confused into thinking the SE/30 is a IIsi, and then tries to call some System routines that aren’t available in the SE/30? Just a guess.
Another possibility is that the version of 6.0.8 that’s on the Floppy Emu’s SD card is missing some data that’s supposed to be in the System file, and which is actually the source of the problem. For example, I know it’s missing some of the standard bitmap font sizes, though this shouldn’t cause an Unimplemented Trap error. I suspect this particular 6.0.8 System file was borrowed from a Disk Tools floppy rather than being the result of running the full 6.0.8 installer. It would help to try Tetris Max on a Macintosh II series machine with either System 6.0.7, or a fresh install of 6.0.8 from the installer floppies.
Debugging
I was able to dig through many layers of dusty old backups, and get Tetris Max rebuilt and running in the debugger with Codewarrior Pro, on an emulated System 9.0 PowerPC Macintosh with Sheepshaver. I stepped through all the code that runs between application launch and when the game window appears, and didn’t see anything that’s obviously System 7-only, but there’s a lot of code and I don’t have a good sense of which OS calls might be to blame. If you’re a developer, you can find the source code at Macintosh Garden.
Ideally I would run Tetris Max in the debugger on a color-capable 68K Mac with System 6.0.8, and go step-by-step until the game crashes, but there are a couple of problems with that approach. The version of Codewarrior Pro that Tetris Max is built with probably doesn’t work under System 6, or on Mac systems as old as the Macintosh II series. Even if it does, I don’t currently have working hardware to do it.
Macintosh Garden also has older versions of Tetris Max, including 2.8, 2.3.1, and older. If I can get the game running on real hardware, or somebody else can try it and report their results, I could find out what version broke the System 6 compatibility. That could provide more clues.
If my ancient memories are correct, someone could also install MacsBug on their Mac, and then they’d get more debugging info when the error occurs, instead of a mostly-useless “unimplemented trap” message. I think MacsBug would report which Toolbox trap the game tried to call, which would be very useful to know.
For the moment, the only viable debugging approach I can think of is to create a series of instrumented builds of Tetris Max, which beep or log their progress to a file during startup, and share these builds with people who can help test. That could eventually narrow down the point of the crash until the offending Toolbox call is identified. From there I could hopefully implement a work-around. But this approach is barely better than inserting PRINT statements into a 1979 BASIC program to aid with debugging, and I don’t like it very much. 30 years later, shouldn’t there be an easier method of debugging?
This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.
It’s four answers to four questions. Here we go…
1. I’m struggling with leaving a field I’m proud to be in
I’m female and in my late 30s (relevance will become apparent). I was working as a secondary maths tutor when I saw an ad urging me to consider firefighting and, on a whim, I applied. Unexpectedly, after rounds of tests, I got in, so I moved from part-time, home-based, self-employed work to full-time, station-based, 12-hour shifts. I stopped being the primary parent, put my youngest into full-time nursery, and turned my family’s lives upside down by disappearing for training for eight weeks.
I loved that I was showing my children that you can dare to be bad at something again, and showing all children (and some adults) that women can be firefighters too. In the UK, women make up 6% of firefighters. The feminist in me has been cheering herself hoarse for the last 18 months.
But I’m not very good at the job. Mostly I struggle with just how much there is to learn.
I’ve been persevering but fairly frequently not enjoying it because it isn’t easy to be bad at something. I’m passing the assessments but the final, biggest ones are coming up and the feedback I get is that I’m not up to scratch. I don’t think I can sustainably work harder. I wonder whether it’s time to say I tried but it’s not happening.
I think I’d feel like a failure if I quit, and I’d be embarrassed to have to tell people. Being a firefighter gets you such kudos, it’s lovely, and I enjoy the surprise I see in people’s faces. How do I give up and have peace of mind? How do I get my inner feminist to forgive me?
One way to look at it is that it’s useful to show your kids that you don’t need to keep doing something for the external kudos if it doesn’t actually fulfill you. And also, that there’s value in trying new things and it doesn’t commit you to doing them forever. And that it’s okay to say, “I tried this, I learned a ton, it ended up not being ideal for me, and I’m choosing to do something else.”
Keep in mind, too, that you don’t need to frame it to people (or yourself!) as a failure — you can tell people, “It was a lot of work and I’m glad I tried it but it’s not something that fits me well long-term.” Or, “I learned a ton, including that I don’t think it’s something I’m going to build my life around long-term.” Or, “I’m so happy I did it, but there are a bunch of reasons I decided not to continue.”
Also! While I understand the pleasure of seeing people’s surprise when you tell them you’re a firefighter, that’s not enough to compromise your day-to-day quality of life. That’s especially true for something you really just tried on a whim! This would be harder if it had been your lifelong dream … my advice would still be the same, because sometimes dreams turn out really different in reality and you shouldn’t tether yourself to a life that Current You doesn’t want just because Old You did, but maybe there’s some comfort in the fact that this wasn’t that.
Plus, you’ll forever be able to tell people “I used to be a firefighter” and that’s pretty great too.
2. I saw my boss’s NSFW social media
I’m a shift supervisor at a coffeeshop and my direct manager is my store manager, “Jane.” I am 25 and Jane is 26. We’re both fairly competent with technology and the internet. Jane has a very unique name that isn’t common in the U.S. Recently, Facebook and Instagram have been recommending her profile to me and my coworkers. We’ve all been recommended to each other recently so no one really thought about it.
I clicked on her Instagram out of sheer curiosity. She has a public personal profile. I checked her Facebook and found it’s public as well. I could quickly identify that it was her and not someone with the same name. I took the username from the Instagram profile and googled it, and the second result was a public Twitter profile. It had a different username but the display name matched the username from the Instagram. I scrolled twice and stumbled on furry NSFW art.
Is it my fault for going out of my way to look for her? Should I discreetly tell her that she’s easy to find on the internet? None of the content on her social media is related to her job, I just accidentally know too much about her.
Leave it alone. You didn’t do anything wrong — people google their coworkers, and while you went further than most with googling her username, it’s not a major crime to do that. But you risk making things weird at work if you bring it up with her. Pretend you didn’t see it, wipe it from your mind, and possibly be less expansive about how you search for coworkers in the future.
3. Negotiating when a job offers less than you’re currently making
I’ve been in my current position for seven years working in nonprofit marketing. I recently applied for a recruitment and communications position at my old college. I wasn’t looking for a new job, but was excited about the opportunity to work there and recruit students for the major that I studied. The salary wasn’t disclosed and said it would be based on experience. I researched the title and salary ranges for my city and most were upwards of $50k-$78k. This would be life-changing for my partner and me. So I decided to go for it. I spent three hours crafting a strong cover letter and sprucing up my resume and it landed me a spot as a finalist. They quickly started talking with my references and brought me in for a panel interview and to meet the program director. I felt like I interviewed well and they liked the questions I had. At the end I asked about compensation – framing it as I wanted to be respectful of their time and asking what the budgeted range of compensation was. They said they were unsure, but gave me a number they thought was going to be where they landed. It was $38k, several thousand lower than what I currently make. My partner and I are already struggling financially and I can’t take a pay cut. I asked the compensation question in the panel interview and in the meeting with the director since they were separate but the answer was the same.
Later that night, I sent this message: “Thanks again for meeting with me today to discuss the X opening. It was great to learn more about the scope of the position and the initiatives Y is exploring to import creative talent to Y. I remain deeply interested in the position and appreciate your candor regarding the compensation budget. In that spirit of openness, I feel it’s essential to be transparent as well. While I find the role highly appealing, the proposed salary of $38k is below my current compensation level of X. I must uphold a minimum salary requirement of $50k for my next role. I understand that this may impact my candidacy as a finalist, but I believe it’s crucial to communicate this as openly as you were with me during our discussions. Thank you for your understanding, I look forward to any further discussions about the position.”
This was their response: “I’m not sure if you’ve already heard from X, but I did speak with him about this. Unfortunately we won’t be able to meet your salary requirements, though it’s very understandable. I’m sorry we weren’t able to save you the time you spent by listing the salary range clearly upfront, but sadly I don’t have say over such things. It really was a pleasure to meet you! I hope to see you at art events around town.”
Etiquette-wise, could I have handled this better? Did I jump the gun by disclosing this? I know it might have been better to speak up about this in the interview, but I was still processing their answer. I knew sharing a salary goal $12k higher than they expected was likely to eliminate me, but I didn’t want to wait until the last minute to be honest about where my financial standards are at. I also didn’t want to disclose my specific wages of where I’m currently at. I had some friends say I should have waited to see if I actually landed anything to counter, and others said it was professional to let them know sooner rather than later.
Nope, you’re fine. It doesn’t make sense for either side to invest further time in the interview process if you’re not going to be able to agree on salary. It’s good to get the employer to name a number first if you can so that you don’t inadvertently lowball yourself — but you got them to, and the number they shared was well below what you’d accept. It’s smart to just get that into the open and see if it makes sense to continue on or not.
If I could change anything you did, I’d say not to peg your salary expectations to what you’re earning currently, but rather to the market rate for the work. “Pay me more because I want to earn more than I’m earning now” will never be as compelling — or as relevant — to the employer as “you should pay more because it’s the market rate for this work done at the level you want.”
4. Do I need to wrap up our department D&D game as we get more hires?
I used to be in one department at my company, and when I was there we started up a department Dungeons & Dragons game. I’m not a manager, but I am the Dungeon Master. At the time, the team was me and four others, including the director of the department, which is arguably the perfect size for a campaign. One of the players has since moved on to another job entirely. We kept her in the game and have added a new hire from the department so they didn’t feel like the odd man out, so we’re up to five players. Our team is about to get two more people, which is awesome, but I don’t want the new people to feel like they’re not getting in on a department social event even if it is outside of work hours and only one Wednesday a month. I might be able to run a game for seven, but that’s getting a little dicey in size for me to manage. Is there a way for the campaign to keep going or do I have to wrap it up so the two new folks aren’t missing out on social face time with their manager and their department?
Can you see if they’re interested and, if they are, break it into two games with someone else from the group DM’ing the second one? (I don’t know enough about D&D to know if this is practical.)
I do think there’s potentially a question for your manager at some point about whether she feels like the D&D players are getting extra access to her, but that’s not something you need to preemptively solve for her (and frankly, one Wednesday a month isn’t a huge deal anyway).
A conservative commentator and columnist, Ben Shapiro co-founded the Daily Wire website and is host of the podcast The Ben Shapiro Show. If you know someone who is a fan of Ben Shapiro, here are things you should never say.
WASHINGTON—Recognizing the need for funds to repair numerous damages after a night of drinking, Congress passed a $55 billion infrastructure bill Friday to fill the holes their angry boyfriend punched in the nation. “We’re enacting this legislation to patch up the thousands of miles of roads and bridges our boyfriend…
The odds of an eastern Atlantic tropical wave developing have increased to 40 percent today, but while it’s worth watching (especially in Bermuda), for now it seems most likely to turn away from the Caribbean and America.
Happening now: We’re still a few days away from the next Atlantic wave’s development window
If I showed you a satellite image of the Atlantic this morning, and I asked you to identify the area you would be most interested in monitoring for tropical development, I would assume that you’d pick the one near Florida.
The current view of the tropics on Thursday morning: Storms near Florida and lots of disjointed activity in the open Atlantic. (College of DuPage)
While that is certainly beefy looking, it’s being entirely driven by an upper-level low, not a surface-based system. Tropical development is unlikely to nil in that case. Though, this will hopefully do something to temper the outrageously warm water temperatures surrounding Florida right now. That said, modeling is actually latching onto the tropical wave located this morning around 30°W longitude. If we look at that on satellite, we’re probably all giving it the Larry David treatment.
The tropical wave that models have become fairly bullish on is rather disorganized at this time. Odds of development are near zero in the immediate term but increase to 40 percent over the next 3 to 7 days. (Weathernerds.org)
But! As we go through the next few days, this area is expected to consolidate some and become a little better organized. It will track generally west or west-northwest. Modeling insists it could develop. There is actually very good agreement between the GFS and European operational models and their ensembles (which are 30 to 50 different runs of the model with various initial tweaks) that this will develop, albeit not in a huge way. That aside, this is arguably the best agreement we’ve seen since Don formed. In my estimation, models have tended to be rather aggressive with development in the main development region (MDR) and Caribbean this year. So, while odds of development are on the increase and there’s good model agreement on this, we’ll see. Model odds of development over the next week are probably closer to 80 or 90 percent, but given recent struggles, the NHC estimate of 40 percent seems much more realistic to me.
Anyway, development of this system will likely be slow as it comes westward over the next 3 to 5 days.
The medium range (days 6 to 10): That tropical wave (should) swim with the fishes
One other thing that the models are in good agreement on right now is that whatever happens with this tropical wave, it is likely to turn northwest and north and eventually out to sea, missing the Caribbean and the U.S. Never say never, but that’s comforting for now. I would argue that there’s good reason to watch this if you are in Bermuda though just in case.
As the disturbance comes west, it should be able to split the gap in a weakness between two high pressure systems over the Atlantic, which should allow it to turn north and avoid most land. (Tropical Tidbits)
Beyond this wave, there’s nothing terribly exciting to focus on in the tropics through day ten.
Fantasyland (beyond day 10): All good for now
Quite frankly, it’s almost disturbingly quiet on the models right now out in the extended range. It does seem like we’re entering a briefly hostile background period in the Atlantic beginning around the first day of August. This is due to background activity associated with the Madden-Julian Oscillation and convectively coupled Kelvin waves. I won’t get into the heavy details here, but you can read and learn about the MJO and hurricanes and convectively coupled Kelvin waves here. Eric Blake at the NHC is a great forecaster, and this presentation that the WMO has online is really useful. All that to say that I would suspect that things pick back up again after August 10th or so.
We haven’t written a whole lot about the 2023 Atlantic hurricane season yet on Space City Weather because there just has not been a whole lot to write about, and certainly nothing threatening to the Gulf of Mexico. However, that is likely to start changing in another two or three weeks, as we approach the heart of the season. I am particularly concerned about the extremely warm sea surface temperatures in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, which would support the rapid intensification of hurricanes.
In any case, today we are cross-posting our daily update from The Eyewall. This is the new website that Matt and I created this year to provide more in-depth coverage about storms across the Atlantic. This will not change anything we do on Space City Weather; but for those interested in the broader tropics, it provides much more information about all that is happening. So if you have friends or family members beyond Houston who are interested in tropical weather, this is a good place to point them to. Without further ado, then, here is today’s post on The Eyewall.
One-sentence summary
The odds of an eastern Atlantic tropical wave developing have increased to 40 percent today, but while it’s worth watching (especially in Bermuda), for now it seems most likely to turn away from the Caribbean and America.
Happening now: We’re still a few days away from the next Atlantic wave’s development window
If I showed you a satellite image of the Atlantic this morning, and I asked you to identify the area you would be most interested in monitoring for tropical development, I would assume that you’d pick the one near Florida.
The current view of the tropics on Thursday morning: Storms near Florida and lots of disjointed activity in the open Atlantic. (College of DuPage)
While that is certainly beefy looking, it’s being entirely driven by an upper-level low, not a surface-based system. Tropical development is unlikely to nil in that case. Though, this will hopefully do something to temper the outrageously warm water temperatures surrounding Florida right now. That said, modeling is actually latching onto the tropical wave located this morning around 30°W longitude. If we look at that on satellite, we’re probably all giving it the Larry David treatment.
The tropical wave that models have become fairly bullish on is rather disorganized at this time. Odds of development are near zero in the immediate term but increase to 40 percent over the next 3 to 7 days. (Weathernerds.org)
But! As we go through the next few days, this area is expected to consolidate some and become a little better organized. It will track generally west or west-northwest. Modeling insists it could develop. There is actually very good agreement between the GFS and European operational models and their ensembles (which are 30 to 50 different runs of the model with various initial tweaks) that this will develop, albeit not in a huge way. That aside, this is arguably the best agreement we’ve seen since Don formed. In my estimation, models have tended to be rather aggressive with development in the main development region (MDR) and Caribbean this year. So, while odds of development are on the increase and there’s good model agreement on this, we’ll see. Model odds of development over the next week are probably closer to 80 or 90 percent, but given recent struggles, the NHC estimate of 40 percent seems much more realistic to me.
Anyway, development of this system will likely be slow as it comes westward over the next 3 to 5 days.
The medium range (days 6 to 10): That tropical wave (should) swim with the fishes
One other thing that the models are in good agreement on right now is that whatever happens with this tropical wave, it is likely to turn northwest and north and eventually out to sea, missing the Caribbean and the U.S. Never say never, but that’s comforting for now. I would argue that there’s good reason to watch this if you are in Bermuda though just in case.
As the disturbance comes west, it should be able to split the gap in a weakness between two high pressure systems over the Atlantic, which should allow it to turn north and avoid most land. (Tropical Tidbits)
Beyond this wave, there’s nothing terribly exciting to focus on in the tropics through day ten.
Fantasyland (beyond day 10): All good for now
Quite frankly, it’s almost disturbingly quiet on the models right now out in the extended range. It does seem like we’re entering a briefly hostile background period in the Atlantic beginning around the first day of August. This is due to background activity associated with the Madden–Julian oscillation and convectively coupled Kelvin waves. I won’t get into the heavy details here, but you can read and learn about the MJO and hurricanes and convectively coupled Kelvin waves here. Eric Blake at the NHC is a great forecaster, and this presentation that the WMO has online is really useful. All that to say that I would suspect that things pick back up again after August 10th or so.
WASHINGTON—Having determined the cause of an episode in which the minority leader froze midway through remarks to the press and then remained silent for 19 seconds, doctors confirmed Thursday that Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) had suffered a stroke after imagining a happy Black person. “We ran some tests and discovered…
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) was involved in a multi-car accident on Tuesday in Tennessee as he traveled in a motorcade to a campaign stop for his 2024 presidential bid. He was uninjured. What do you think?
TULSA, OK—The emotion rising in her voice as she pleaded with the device, local woman Alexis Kirk was reportedly desperately trying to unlock her iPhone Thursday using Face ID like an elderly man begging his senile wife to recognize him one last time. “Please, please, please–you know me!” said Kirk, whose eyes welled…
Customs officials intercepted a pickup truck transporting four large wheels of cheese from Mexico that were hiding 17.8 pounds of cocaine. What do you think?
DEARBORN, MI—Touting the new acquisition as “a major upgrade,” the Henry Ford Museum of American Innovation confirmed Thursday that it had traded in its original Model T for a 2008 Subaru Outback. “The Model T was invaluable in its own way of course, but in the end, it simply wasn’t practical,” said museum…
Following Florida’s decision to release new standards for teaching African American history in schools, The Onion examines the biggest benefits slaves got from slavery.
Joy Alonzo was suspended and investigated after she allegedly criticized Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick at a lecture on the opioid crisis. Free speech advocates call the probe "blatantly inappropriate."
Colophon: Recent publications, upcoming/recent appearances, current writing projects, current reading
The surprising truth about data-driven dictatorships (permalink)
Here's the "dictator's dilemma": they want to block their country's frustrated elites from mobilizing against them, so they censor public communications; but they also want to know what their people truly believe, so they can head off simmering resentments before they boil over into regime-toppling revolutions.
These two strategies are in tension: the more you censor, the less you know about the true feelings of your citizens and the easier it will be to miss serious problems until they spill over into the streets (think: the fall of the Berlin Wall or Tunisia before the Arab Spring). Dictators try to square this circle with things like private opinion polling or petition systems, but these capture a small slice of the potentially destabiziling moods circulating in the body politic.
Enter AI: back in 2018, Yuval Harari proposed that AI would supercharge dictatorships by mining and summarizing the public mood – as captured on social media – allowing dictators to tack into serious discontent and diffuse it before it erupted into unequenchable wildfire:
Harari wrote that "the desire to concentrate all information and power in one place may become [dictators'] decisive advantage in the 21st century." But other political scientists sharply disagreed. Last year, Henry Farrell, Jeremy Wallace and Abraham Newman published a thoroughgoing rebuttal to Harari in Foreign Affairs:
They argued that – like everyone who gets excited about AI, only to have their hopes dashed – dictators seeking to use AI to understand the public mood would run into serious training data bias problems. After all, people living under dictatorships know that spouting off about their discontent and desire for change is a risky business, so they will self-censor on social media. That's true even if a person isn't afraid of retaliation: if you know that using certain words or phrases in a post will get it autoblocked by a censorbot, what's the point of trying to use those words?
The phrase "Garbage In, Garbage Out" dates back to 1957. That's how long we've known that a computer that operates on bad data will barf up bad conclusions. But this is a very inconvenient truth for AI weirdos: having given up on manually assembling training data based on careful human judgment with multiple review steps, the AI industry "pivoted" to mass ingestion of scraped data from the whole internet.
But adding more unreliable data to an unreliable dataset doesn't improve its reliability. GIGO is the iron law of computing, and you can't repeal it by shoveling more garbage into the top of the training funnel:
When it comes to "AI" that's used for decision support – that is, when an algorithm tells humans what to do and they do it – then you get something worse than Garbage In, Garbage Out – you get Garbage In, Garbage Out, Garbage Back In Again. That's when the AI spits out something wrong, and then another AI sucks up that wrong conclusion and uses it to generate more conclusions.
To see this in action, consider the deeply flawed predictive policing systems that cities around the world rely on. These systems suck up crime data from the cops, then predict where crime is going to be, and send cops to those "hotspots" to do things like throw Black kids up against a wall and make them turn out their pockets, or pull over drivers and search their cars after pretending to have smelled cannabis.
The problem here is that "crime the police detected" isn't the same as "crime." You only find crime where you look for it. For example, there are far more incidents of domestic abuse reported in apartment buildings than in fully detached homes. That's not because apartment dwellers are more likely to be wife-beaters: it's because domestic abuse is most often reported by a neighbor who hears it through the walls.
So if your cops practice racially biased policing (I know, this is hard to imagine, but stay with me /s), then the crime they detect will already be a function of bias. If you only ever throw Black kids up against a wall and turn out their pockets, then every knife and dime-bag you find in someone's pockets will come from some Black kid the cops decided to harass.
That's life without AI. But now let's throw in predictive policing: feed your "knives found in pockets" data to an algorithm and ask it to predict where there are more knives in pockets, and it will send you back to that Black neighborhood and tell you do throw even more Black kids up against a wall and search their pockets. The more you do this, the more knives you'll find, and the more you'll go back and do it again.
This is what Patrick Ball from the Human Rights Data Analysis Group calls "empiricism washing": take a biased procedure and feed it to an algorithm, and then you get to go and do more biased procedures, and whenever anyone accuses you of bias, you can insist that you're just following an empirical conclusion of a neutral algorithm, because "math can't be racist."
HRDAG has done excellent work on this, finding a natural experiment that makes the problem of GIGOGBI crystal clear. The National Survey On Drug Use and Health produces the gold standard snapshot of drug use in America. Kristian Lum and William Isaac took Oakland's drug arrest data from 2010 and asked Predpol, a leading predictive policing product, to predict where Oakland's 2011 drug use would take place.
Then, they compared those predictions to the outcomes of the 2011 survey, which shows where actual drug use took place. The two maps couldn't be more different:
Predpol told cops to go and look for drug use in a predominantly Black, working class neighborhood. Meanwhile the NSDUH survey showed the actual drug use took place all over Oakland, with a higher concentration in the Berkeley-neighboring student neighborhood.
What's even more vivid is what happens when you simulate running Predpol on the new arrest data that would be generated by cops following its recommendations. If the cops went to that Black neighborhood and found more drugs there and told Predpol about it, the recommendation gets stronger and more confident.
In other words, GIGOGBI is a system for concentrating bias. Even trace amounts of bias in the original training data get refined and magnified when they are output though a decision support system that directs humans to go an act on that output. Algorithms are to bias what centrifuges are to radioactive ore: a way to turn minute amounts of bias into pluripotent, indestructible toxic waste.
There's a great name for an AI that's trained on an AI's output, courtesy of Jathan Sadowski: "Habsburg AI."
And that brings me back to the Dictator's Dilemma. If your citizens are self-censoring in order to avoid retaliation or algorithmic shadowbanning, then the AI you train on their posts in order to find out what they're really thinking will steer you in the opposite direction, so you make bad policies that make people angrier and destabilize things more.
Or at least, that was Farrell(et al)'s theory. And for many years, that's where the debate over AI and dictatorship has stalled: theory vs theory. But now, there's some empirical data on this, thanks to the "The Digital Dictator’s Dilemma," a new paper from UCSD PhD candidate Eddie Yang:
Yang figured out a way to test these dueling hypotheses. He got 10 million Chinese social media posts from the start of the pandemic, before companies like Weibo were required to censor certain pandemic-related posts as politically sensitive. Yang treats these posts as a robust snapshot of public opinion: because there was no censorship of pandemic-related chatter, Chinese users were free to post anything they wanted without having to self-censor for fear of retaliation or deletion.
Next, Yang acquired the censorship model used by a real Chinese social media company to decide which posts should be blocked. Using this, he was able to determine which of the posts in the original set would be censored today in China.
That means that Yang knows that the "real" sentiment in the Chinese social media snapshot is, and what Chinese authorities would believe it to be if Chinese users were self-censoring all the posts that would be flagged by censorware today.
From here, Yang was able to play with the knobs, and determine how "preference-falsification" (when users lie about their feelings) and self-censorship would give a dictatorship a misleading view of public sentiment. What he finds is that the more repressive a regime is – the more people are incentivized to falsify or censor their views – the worse the system gets at uncovering the true public mood.
What's more, adding additional (bad) data to the system doesn't fix this "missing data" problem. GIGO remains an iron law of computing in this context, too.
But it gets better (or worse, I guess): Yang models a "crisis" scenario in which users stop self-censoring and start articulating their true views (because they've run out of fucks to give). This is the most dangerous moment for a dictator, and depending on the dictatorship handles it, they either get another decade of rule, or they wake up with guillotines on their lawns.
But "crisis" is where AI performs the worst. Trained on the "status quo" data where users are continuously self-censoring and preference-falsifying, AI has no clue how to handle the unvarnished truth. Both itts recommendations about what to censor and its summaries of public sentiment are the least accurate when crisis erupts.
But here's an interesting wrinkle: Yang scraped a bunch of Chinese users' posts from Twitter – which the Chinese government doesn't get to censor (yet) or spy on (yet) – and fed them to the model. He hypothesized that when Chinese users post to American social media, they don't self-censor or preference-falsify, so this data should help the model improve its accuracy.
He was right – the model got significantly better once it ingested data from Twitter than when it was working solely from Weibo posts. And Yang notes that dictatorships all over the world are widely understood to be scraping western/northern social media.
But even though Twitter data improved the model's accuracy, it was still wildly inaccurate, compared to the same model trained on a full set of un-self-censored, un-falsified data. GIGO is not an option, it's the law (of computing).
Writing about the study on Crooked Timber, Farrell notes that as the world fills up with "garbage and noise" (he invokes Philip K Dick's delighted coinage "gubbish"), "approximately correct knowledge becomes the scarce and valuable resource."
This "probably approximately correct knowledge" comes from humans, not LLMs or AI, and so "the social applications of machine learning in non-authoritarian societies are just as parasitic on these forms of human knowledge production as authoritarian governments."
"Chokepoint Capitalism: How to Beat Big Tech, Tame Big Content, and Get Artists Paid, with Rebecca Giblin", on how to unrig the markets for creative labor, Beacon Press/Scribe 2022 https://chokepointcapitalism.com
"Attack Surface": The third Little Brother novel, a standalone technothriller for adults. The Washington Post called it "a political cyberthriller, vigorous, bold and savvy about the limits of revolution and resistance." Order signed, personalized copies from Dark Delicacies https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1840/Available_Now%3A_Attack_Surface.html
The Internet Con: A nonfiction book about interoperability and Big Tech, Verso, September 2023
The Lost Cause: a post-Green New Deal eco-topian novel about truth and reconciliation with white nationalist militias, Tor Books, November 2023
This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.
Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/0f1997288bb54650357057c24f2137b7/20230728%20ncidp%20impact.jpg)
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/3588c1aa980e904244ba2aeb20dec74f/0728%20Lee%20Whitmire%20Mayor%20Race%20Houston.jpg)
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/3989f793e767a77ff5457fab43fd011e/U.S.%20Capitol%20Police%20REUTERS%20TT%2001.jpg)
