#apply online transcripts | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

galedekarios · 1 year ago

Text

gale's early access dialogue transcripts - part 3: dialogues regarding various decisions & quest progression

in early access, companions used to react much more to the decisions you made in dialogue as well as the overall quest progression pertaining to the main quest as well as side quests, and the events happening around them.

these conversations would be shorter in nature and were usually marked with an exclamation mark ( ! ) over their head.

some of these conversations survived the transition from early access to the full release, but they are very few and far between. the only ones that did survive are 1) gale's reaction to nettie poisoning the protag, 2) gale's reaction to saving mirkon, and 3) gale's reaction to saving arabella.

gale was much, much more responsive in early access and had conversations with the protag about a variety of topics.

following are all cut conversations / dialogues with gale (excluding the deer stew scene and loss scene, which i have covered here and here, but have decided to exclude because they are much longer conversations):

overview:

jergal's temple

reaching the druid's grove / emerald enclave

arabella the tiefling child dies / protag stood by and did nothing

protag killed lae'zel after lae'zel tried to prevent them from turning into a mind flayer

karlach vs anders, the paladin of tyr / agent of zariel

after edowin / the siblings brynna and andrick

killing the druids

arriving at the goblin camp

finding out that the absolute's brand is magic

about true souls

dror ragzlin & the dead mindflayer

ogre + bugbear couple in moonhaven

giving the necromancy of thay tome to gale (dialogue option in player-initiated dialogue / gale asks for tome)

on ethel

on ethel's deal

after finishing mayrina's quest

the zhentarim chest / rugan

the myconid colony in the underdark

defending astarion to gandrel the gur monster hunter

handing astarion over to gandrel the gur monster hunter

arka the tiefling (kanon's sister) kills sazza the goblin / protag stood by and watched it happen

letting sazza escape

finding out about priestess gut from sazza

below the read more, you'll find the transcripts of these 23 cut conversations.

where i can and still have them, i will include screenshots and, when i can find them online, i will include links to watch those conversation in video format.

jergal's temple [link to gifset]

Gale: Bad form, isn't it? Grave robbing? Judging by those undead guardians, the architects of this crypt certainly thought so. - Protag Option 1: I'm desperate, not proud. Best to take what I can get. Gale: Then again, to be alive is to be curious. - Protag Option 2: Dressing up the dead is pointless. They have no need for trinkets. Gale: Never lost a loved one, have you? Then again, those who loved these loved ones are dust and bones themselves. - Protag Option 3: A good fight and fine treasure. What's not to like? Gale: I suppose that's one way to spin it. - Protag Option 4: Why care about decorum in a long-abandoned tomb? Gale: Because my mother raised a gentleman. Then again, to be alive is to be curious. - Protag Option 5 [Cleric]: True. My god might not be particularly happy about it. Gale: You can pray for your sins later. I’m told that does the trick. Gale: Let's have a look at the loot. It isn't for your pockets only.

2. reaching the druid's grove / emerald enclave

Gale: So much for finding a safe haven. - Protag Option 1: This is a druid grove. With a bit of luck we'll find help here. Gale: Druids master the ancient magic that is part of nature's fabric itself. They can make bloom, and they can make wither. Let's hope the latter applies to tadpoles. - Protag Option 2: We won't linger long. Gale: And we shouldn't – but we'd be remiss not to give the place a once-over. Druids master the ancient magic that is part of nature's fabric itself. They can make bloom, and they can make wither. Let's hope the latter applies to tadpoles.

3. arabella the tiefling child dies / protag stood by and did nothing [link to gifset]

Gale: This place is a snake pit in more ways than one. That poor girl... Such sudden madness.... And what did we do? We stood by and watched. Her parents – we'll have to tell them that we failed. - Protag Option 1: Our priority remains to find a healer. The most dangerous snake is in our heads, remember? Gale: Distinctly. But it hasn't poisoned my sense of right and wrong just yet. How about yours? - Protag Option 2: We're here on Zevlor's behalf. Let's not lose sight of that. Gale: Yes, nothing like serving up a dead child as the appetiser to successful negotiations. - Protag Option 3: Her parents deserve to know what happened. And that we are not to blame. Gale: So inaction equals innocence? There's a small corpse on the floor over there that might just beg to differ. - Protag Option 4: This is none of our concern. Where there's strife, there will be blood. Gale: And where there's blood, there will be vengeance. This troubled grove is about to become far more troubled still. - [Arabella died because protag failed the DC twice] Protag Option 5: The girl really should have left the druid's idol alone. Look where it got her. Gale: If the errors of youth deserve an early grave, none of us would live to see a dozen summers. There is no justification for this tragedy.

4. protag killed lae'zel after lae'zel tried to prevent them from turning into a mind flayer

Gale: Lae'zel... that was brutal. Are you all right? I'm here if you want to talk about it. - Protag Option 1: Is there anything left to say? Gale: She was alive. Now she is dead. Might be worth a few words. Then again, maybe not. What a night... - Protag Option 2: She was danger to us all. She didn't leave me with a choice. Gale: I was not judging, merely offering my sympathy. One moment we are travelling together, then the next... - Protag Option 3: Don't bother. It's over and done with. Gale: Words as final as your acts. One moment we are travelling together, then the next...

5. karlach vs anders, the paladin of tyr / agent of zariel

Gale: I have to say I don't know if agreeing to this hunt was such a wise idea. Who's to say who's the real villain in this tale of devils and masquerades? - Protag Option 1: Cheer up! It'll be fun. Gale: Yes, I used to sign up for a round of Kill-The-Stranger every tenday back home [sarcastic]. When we track Karlach down, let's chat before we chop. - Protag Option 2: You're saying I shouldn't trust a bunch of devil-sworn pretending to be paladins of Tyr? Gale: I'm saying I really shouldn't have to point that out. When we track Karlach down, let's chat before we chop. - Protag Option 3: It's easy: I say who the villain is. Gale: My, so it's you who is Tyr then, the mighty judge of justice? Go ahead, tell them. I'm sure they'd love to fawn all over their erstwhile patron.

6. after edowin / the siblings brynna and andrick

Gale: I have to say, it's one thing to have a parasite in your head, quite another not to know it's there. What's more, these people weren't on the nautiloid with us. Just how many mind flayers are at work in these parts? - Protag Option 1: The real question is: how does this all link to their belief in this “Absolute”? Gale: Mind flayers excel -> See Option 3 - Protag Option 2: Do you really think there may be more mind flayers around? Gale: This True Soul and his acolytes are ample proof of that... They 're ample proof of a dread suspicion as well. - Protag Option 3: Let's move. I don't mean to lose daylight pondering idle questions. Gale: You really do dismiss these events too casually. - Gale: Mind flayers excel at mind games. To enthral completely is their bread and butter. What if they perfected their craft by convincing their subjects they're not thralls at all, but that they have free will? That the commandments they experience are the will of a benevolent god. How terrifying a level of perfection that would be.

7. killing the druids

Gale: If Silvanus is the mighty oak, his druids were but the weakest of his leaves, tossed by the winds of fury. I can't shake the image of what happened to the grove: the winds have blown and the harvest has come. The oak stands lone and barren. - Protag [Druid] Option 1: A grove destroyed... I dont think I can forgive myself. Gale: After winter, spring will come, but I'm not sure we left behind much fertile ground. - Protag [Druid] Option 2: The druids caused the harvest. It was only just we did the reaping. Gale: Yes, well, I prefer to pluck apples and pick strawberries. They don't tend to weigh on one's conscience. - Protag Option 3: They were in need of a lesson – and we taught it well. Gale: One usually needs to be alive to reap the benefits of education. If anything, we taught them too well. - Protag Option 4: They felt threatened and lashed out. A tragedy I wish we could have avoided. Gale: Their action are on them, that much is true, but the consequences are ours to carry - Protag Option 5: Come, let's move on. What's done is done. Gale: Look around you. What's done is done, but what's wrong is also wrong.

8. arriving at the goblin camp [link to gifset]

Gale: Amid all this grandeur sunk into squalor, I wonder what dismal corner we'll find Halsin in. - Protag Option 1: Any suggestions? Gale: Prisoners are treated the same by everyone: they serve as serfs, or they waste away in a dungeon. Stands to reason we'll find Halsin in either one of these less-than-appealing conditions. - Protag Option 2: What grandeur is that? Gale: This must have been a splendid complex once, a temple of impressive proportions. Worshippers lived here. Pilgrims visited. They required food, shelter, ceremony, entertainment. Now that it's nothing but a goblin-ridden death-trap? Plenty of places to hide away a druid, I imagine. - Protag Option 3: With our luck? Marinating in a cooking pot most likely. Gale: A hearty serving of druid stew wouldn't do us any good. No, let's hope the best and keep this in mind: Prisoners are treated the same by everyone: they serve as serfs, or they waste away in a dungeon. If he's still alive, it stands to reason we'll find Halsin in either one of these less-than-appealing conditions. Well -more-than-appealing conditions come to think of it, when one considers the stew alternative.

9. finding out that the absolute's brand is magic

Gut: Hold out your arm so I can mark your flesh. It's charged with magic. Ordinary slobs can't see it; only us that follow the Absolute. Gale: Charged with magic? Perhaps that explains the ease with which these goblins submit to True Souls.

10. about true souls

Gale: I can hardly wrap my head around what we've just heard. Let's list up the facts, shall we? There are other people here with tadpoles in their heads. They can hear the tadpoles speak to them, and they think it's a new god. I don't know about you, but to me, none of this makes any logical sense. - Protag Option 1: I concur. There doesn't seem to be a logical explanation. Gale: And yet I suspect something... intelligent behind it all. Some carefully nurtured scheme. - Protag Option 2: I'm seeing too many coincidences – which tend to add up to conspiracies. Gale: Evil cults and grand designs, is it? Mind you, I'll not even dispute the possibility. - Protag Option 3: I don't care about logic, I care about solutions. Gale: I'm not sure those are mutually exclusive. If we seek to solve we must seek to comprehend. - Gale: But let's not lose sight of what we've learned here – what joins us and what separates us from these True Souls: They heard a voice we do not hear, a voice that binds them in servitude. As long as we're possessed of our own free will, I venture to say there's hope for us yet.

11. dror ragzlin & the dead mindflayer

Gale: A grand necromantic spectacle staged at the behest of a newfangled god to track down... us. Can't quite say which of these two wins out: to be honoured or to be horrified. - Protag Option 1: The real question is: why are they looking for us? Gale: Several guesses spring to mind, all equally plausible and implausible at once. - Protag Option 2: Not to worry: we easily tricked that hobgoblin – and his god. Gale: We tricked the minion, yes, but its master? I doubt it. - Protag Option 3: Can't say I'm thrilled to be a god's pet project. Gale: Horrified it is then. - Gale: Fact is we're being hunted, but at least we have the hunters at a disadvantage: even here, in the lion's den, they don't recognise us as their prey.

12. ogre + bugbear couple in moonhaven

Gale: One moment they were embracing each other in intimacy, the next they're embracing only death. Can't say I'm proud of our actions here. - Protag Option 1: Me either. We should have left well enough alone Gale: Don't get me wrong, I know they'd have gladly made us their post-coital picnic given half a chance. It just feels wrong to turn lovemaking into life-taking. - Protag Option 2: Playing it a bit fast and loose with the word 'intimacy' there, Gale. Gale: I'm not contemplating definitions, I'm contemplating our deeds. Don't get me wrong, I know they'd have gladly made us their post-coital picnic given half a chance. It just feels wrong to turn lovemaking into life-taking. - Protag Option 3: Don't dwell on it. Ogres and bugbears are nothing but vermin. Gale: And yet they speak and bond and revel. Don't get me wrong, I know they'd have gladly made us their post-coital picnic given half a chance. It just feels wrong to turn lovemaking into life-taking.

13. giving the necromancy of thay tome to gale (dialogue option in player-initiated dialogue / gale asks for tome)

Gale: Much obliged. Narrator: you watch Gale perusing the book with a true wizard's fascination. A few pages in, something startles him. Gale: A rough read indeed... I'll give it my undivided attention at a more appropriate time.

14. on ethel

Gale: You know, I think there's a little something more to Ethel than meets the eye. 'Hag' is the word they used. If that's what she really is, she's beyond dangerous. - Protag Option 1: If that's what she is, that means we killed two innocent men. Gale: But theit sister still lives. And I doubt Auntie has her over for tea and conversation. - Protag Option 2: Hags are powerful creatures. She might actually be able to help us with the parasite. Gale: See Option 3 - Protag Option 3: She hinted at a reward. That's all I really care about. Gale: Beware of a hag bearing gifts. They're never gifts to begin with.

15. on ethel's deal

Gale: Netherese. A portentous word. Combine it with mind flayers, and it's... unspeakable. - Protag Option 1: What do you make of it all? Gale: What we can do is combine what we know and make our deductions. At the heart of it all, the problem is clear: we've been infected by a mind flayer parasite. So far, however, we've been spared the dread fate that is ceremorphosis. How have we been spared? It would seem the answer is that the parasite is somehow infused with Netherese magic – more powerful, more sinister than it has any right to be. The question remains, however: why? Infected, but unchanging. Blind cogs in an all-seeing machine. - Protag Option 2: If even a hag can't help us, who can? Gale: I... I actually don't know. All we can do is combine what we know and make our deductions- See Option 1 - Protag Option 3: It's all gibberish as far as I'm concerned. Gale: No, there's meaning to it. There has to be. All we can do is combine- See Option 1 - Protag Option 4: None of this actually solves our problems. Gale: I know, but let's consider this: at the heart of it all, not only is our problem clear, but so is the motive of our enemy: power. All power has a nexus. Find it, and we may just find both the answers and the remedy we seek. - Protag Option 5: Get to the point if you have one. Gale: I was merely thinking out loud, but if you desire a point, consider this: See Option 4 - Protag Option 6: Enough talk. Let's go. Gale: Fine, but while we walk, consider this: See Option 4

16. after finishing mayrina's quest [link to gifset]

Gale: Hags really do redefine depravity, don't they? A promise kept in the cruellest of ways: a loved one returned, undead. - Protag Option 1: This entire affair sickens me. I wish we'd had no part in it. Gale: We don't always choose the roles we play. All we can do is perform them to the best of our ability. [Connor killed] At least the curtain's fallen on this tragedy. The lovers' tale is quite over. [Connor alive] Can't say I'm very enthusiastic though, about the extra you just cast. - Protag Option 1: Hags thrive on corruption. It is simply their nature Gale: A nature that, as far as I'm concerned, deserves to go extinct. [Connor killed] As extinct as the happiness Ethel cut out of Mayrina. [Connor alive] So does that abhorrent thing-once-man. For god's sake let his eternal sleep be free of this undead nightmare. - Protag Option 3: You have to admit Auntie Ethel knows how to have some fun. Gale: [disapproves] You can't possibly mean that. [Connor killed] In any case, the man's dead for good. The spectacle has come to a close. Fun's over. [Connor alive] Although, judging by the newest company you've decided to keep, you may just be depraved enough yourself to mean that after all.

17. the zhentarim chest / rugan

Gale: So you threatened your way into ownership of that chest. Now that it's yours, what will you do with it? - Protag Option 1: I say we hold on to it until we find the rightful owner. Gale: So that means you're not curious as to what's inside? Very well, suit yourself... - Protag Option 2: Let's seell it. We're bound to make a tidy profit. Gale: See Option 1 - Protag Option 3: I will do what is meant to be done with a sealed chest: open it. Gale: Music to my curious ears!

18. the myconid colony in the underdark [link to gifset]

Gale: Spores that can raise the dead... These myconids certainly are fascinating creatures. Protag Option 1: They make for good allies. Gale: Agreed. And there are precious few of those in the Underdark. - Protag Option 2: They're more dangerous than I thought. We should be on our guard. Gale: They will remain welcome hosts unless we turn hostile. Should be easy enough to avoid. - Protag Option 3: Sorry, but I don't share your fascination for fungi. Gale: Nobody's perfect.

19. defending astarion to gandrel the gur monster hunter [link to youtube video]

[Protag defends Astarion] Gale: How thoroughly invigorating it is to stand by one's friend in the face of danger. Even if that friend is an egomaniacal vampire with moral longevity of a mayfly. - Protag Option 1: We did the right thing and that's all there is to it. Gale: It's charming that you think that. - Protag Option 2: Are you saying that you would have thrown Astarion to the wolves? Gale: Never. What harm did the wolves ever do? - Protag Option 3: I'll remember you skepticism if anyone ever comes looking for you. Gale: ?

20. handing astarion over to gandrel the gur monster hunter

[Protag hands Astarion over to Gandrel the Gur Monster Hunter] Gale: I had a friend who had a dog once. Beautiful animal, but it got mean in its old days. Gale: It would growl and bark at everyone. Even bit him at the end. Gale: Yet still it was the saddest of occasions when he took the dog away for good. - Protag Option 1: It was for the best, I'm sure. Gale: I'm not sure the dog would agree. Gale: Astarion wouldn't. I'm absolutely sure of that. - Protag Option 2: Parting is never easy. Gale: ? - Protag Option 3: Put the mongrel down, did he? Gale: ?

21. arka the tiefling (kanon's sister) kills sazza the goblin / protag stood by and watched it happen [link to gifset]

Gale: Arka's thirst for revenge has been sated... and the goblin welcomed death with open arms. All's well with the world one might argue. And yet there's something unsettling about witnessing an execution. - Protag Option 1: I take no pleasure in it, but justice has been done. Gale: No one will mourn this goblin I suppose. Let's leave it at that. - Protag Option 2: Somehow that sounds a condemnation. Gale: I condemn nothing - but a question can be a mirror: Gale: If it's guilt you see reflected, the condemnation is your own. - Protag Option 3: I have no patience for the squeamish. Gale: You imply a weakness. I say a critical mind is one of our greatest strengths.

22. letting sazza the goblin escape

Gale: I know I said it's not inconceivable a goblin priestess could help us. And yet... was it really wise to set another goblin free so she can arrange introductions? - Protag Option 1: Passing up the promise of a healer would be far more unwise. Gale: A perfectly reasonable train of thoughts. But what if she leads her entire tribe to the grove? - Protag Option 2: What's done is done. Doubt doesn't help us. Gale: I'm not quite done yet. What if she leads her entire tribe to the grove? - Protag Option 3: Keep your misgivings to yourself. Gale: But consider the consequences. What if she leads her entire tribe to the grove? -> Protag Option 1: I'll make sure that doesn't happen Gale: I'm not sure you can. - Protag Option 2: Getting rid of the tadpole comes first. Otherwise we might be the monsters that destroy this place. Gale: Harsh. But fair. If not given too much further thought. - Protag Option 3: I don't care, I owe this grove no allegiance. Gale: No allegiance, no. Though we don't need to sign its death warrant.

23. finding out about priestess gut from sazza

Gale: Booyahg – the goblin word for magic. Primitive to a fault, but not entirely without merit. To seek some goblin priestess' help would be unconventional to say the least. Then again, I'm not one to advocate conventionality. - Protag Option 2: A goblin healer sounds absurd to me. Gale: I wouldn't dismiss the idea out of hand. Goblins come from a warrior culture: to heal wounds is a highly prized skill. - Protag Option 1: I don't care if a cure comes from a goblin, an ogre, or an orc: as long as it works, I'm happy. Gale: My sentiments exactly. - Gale: If this priestess is indeed a master in the arts of booyahg, it's not inconceivable she could be of help to us. And if she isn't, we might find items of interest among her shamanic paraphernalia. If her tribe doesn't kill us on sight, that is.

thank you for reading! please consider liking and reblogging this post to support my work. thank you.

coming up next:

-part 1: the three tadpole dreams -> completed -part 2: major cut scenes: the deer stew scene & the loss scene -> completed -part 3: minor cut scenes: abandoned temple of jergal, failed to save arabella, talking to the paladins of tyr and agreeing to go after karlach, edowin and the tadpole reveal, mayrina giving ethel's wand to her or breaking it, handing astarion over to the gur or defending him, reaching the druid grove, killing lae'zel, reaching the goblin camp & looking for halsin, killing the druids, priestess gut & the brand & the cult of the absolute, dror ragzlin and talking to the dead mind flayer, ogre couple, necromancy of thay, ethel, zhentarim chest, myconid colony -> completed with this post -part 4: gale's condition & the way it was treated in early access

taglist: @chainsawmascara, @randomfanner, @tacogoats, @khajiit-necromancer, @gwinharper, @galesenchantedpanties, @swampfaerie, @ardently-queer, @nirraein, @gale-enjoyer, @xiv-wolfram, @kairoswouldnever, @a-psychopathic-dream, @toboldlydammitjim, @mishtress, @vcxahlia, @fitzmagus,

i thought i'd tag the people i'd seen taking an interest in my original post! if you want to be taken off the taglist, or added, please let me know!

#gale dekarios #gale of waterdeep #baldur's gate 3 #bg3 #baldurs gate 3 #bg3 meta #early access #ch: gale dekarios #vg: baldur's gate 3 #series: baldur's gate #meta: mybg3 #series: eadialogue

523 notes · View notes

spjohnv-blog · 9 months ago

Text

If you're familiar with the South Park Archives, pretty much the only SP fansite still online - there's over eighteen years of history there, pages and renders for tons of characters and locations, thousands of screenshots, a pretty dedicated staff, transcripts of every episode, and so much more. When I made my start writing shitty fanfics, it was a super useful resource, and that was a small chunk of what it is today.

FANDOM has today unveiled a new Offensive Terms Policy which continues a trend in the last few years been suggested in events like Community Connect, where it has previously been suggested wikis avoid references to canonical sex. The avoidance of slurs is something I would be super supportive of generally -- we don't need to see that kind of stuff on Wookiepedia or like, a wiki for Bluey. It'll keep people from vandalizing children's wikis with adult content for kicks. I am generally in favor of content filtering, especially for family-friendly-oriented content.

...but, this is going to cause a lot of problems for the South Park Archives, a show with a major character who frequently uses slurs and is firmly anti-censorship. You don't need to be an editor to think about that. If you're a fan, you know what kind of show we're talking about.

This is a show with episodes called "The Biggest Douche in the Universe", "Major Boobage", "Reverse Cowgirl" and "Titties and Dragons". There are songs like "Fuck the Police" and "Jacking it in San Diego". There is a character called 'Retarded Fish'. The names of these songs and episodes, bear in mind, are legally registered copyrights, not our choices -- how do you change that? Move an article to Episode 1601? What about "Fuck the Police", which isn't even a South Park original song?

You can clean up a synopsis, and formalize language on a character page, I've done both of those things when I was an editor, but you can't undo all of this. How do you?

That's not even getting into the transcripts pages, which are intended to be 100% accurate to the actual dialogue, continuing the tradition from the good ol' South Park Scriptorium...

Within the day of the policy change, FANDOM has already started to make changes to remove slurs from the transcript pages that are unable to be modified as it is directly related to global policy. I don't know that the staff were communicated with about this personally either, but I'm not in the know like I used to be.

No doubt some of this move is prompted by advertisers - FANDOM previously cited advertiser feedback as a motivation for inserting all sorts of videos on top of wiki pages (similar to their later push to include AI-generated content) and understandably many advertisers may not want their brand name mere inches from a discussion of cartoon eight-year-olds using slurs. I mean, shoot, I wouldn't if I were in charge of a major company, and I get someone needs to keep the lights on, but...

I don't know man, it's a shitty position to be in. It's a well-intended policy that I'd support in almost any other context but literally this narrow exception, and I definitely hate the thought of looking like I'd be defending use of offensive terms, but like, how do you cover "everything" about South Park, an explicitly adult show that is so firmly anti-censorship, that builds entire episodes around these kinds of jokes, or even analyze it from a critical perspective, in such a family-friendly, sanitized way, without betraying its spirit and creative intent?

You can imagine how many staff members there are probably scratching their heads or bashing them into lamp posts, trying to figure out what to do or how to move forward after this. They could apply for an exception, but would it even be granted? What would the alternative be? Are restrictions like this worth it or do they render the whole thing moot? How much responsibility lies with FANDOM? Are advertisers forcing the whole internet down this road? There are so many questions in the air on this. I certainly don't have answers.

#south park #south park wiki #wikis #fandom #wikia

60 notes · View notes

not-poignant · 12 days ago

Note

Hi! Reading all your answers about Faber and him being a troublemaker during highschool made me wonder: How did he end up working for Hillview? Sounds like Faber's grades weren't the best when he graduated. Did it need much convincing for Hillview to hire him? (Also this makes me realise how terrible it must be to have a (peak) alpha in the room with you when doing job interviews.)

Faber started working while he was in high school, and his track record in business is actually impeccable. By the time he applied to Hillview, he had a pretty decent resume/CV and a bunch of extra qualifications from online coursework. He'd done different kinds of work and had glowing references. (How he behaved in school was not how he behaved in the workplace, he craved independence and his own income).

And here in Western Australia, almost no one asks for a transcript of your high school grades for many jobs to know how well you did there. So that was totally irrelevant. Like, students might include it if they were dux, or similar, or if they have zero work experience, but once you start getting work experience that matters far more.

As for convincing Hillview - yeah he still had to work hard to convince them because he was so young. But Faber is bright and affable and likes to learn, and he was very 'why don't you try me for free for a few weeks and you'll soon see that I will be an indispensable part of the Hillview team' and I think they knew that within like 5 days.

#asks and answers #faber castle #underline the red #faber didn't go straight from school to a job #faber was working jobs before it was technically legal for him to do that #(i.e. before the age of 14)#by the time he got hired at hillview #he had years of experience in the workplace #even at the tender age of 19 #administrator gwyn wants this in the queue

19 notes · View notes

ohmuqueen · 11 months ago

Text

A good source of background info about Jongtae’s performance of “Internet War” from the SHINee reddit

transcript below:

[comment by user @/xiola_azuthra on reddit]:

The following is mainly copypasted from my comment in a thread here from 2 years ago, so please don't think any of my generalizations about fans-in-general is directed specifically at you or your own assumptions (I don't know what your assumptions are and whatever they are they're totally okay!). Some references are below as well.

I just always like to take the chance to bring this up since much of the fandom (especially the international fandom who haven't read the lyrics) has a tendency to always frame the discussion of this performance on the fanservice and homoeroticism elements, when it's actually MANY more layers than that (and the deeper layers are arguably the more interesting an important ones IMO); IMO Internet War is actually the opposite of "pure" fanervice; the fanservice is just the medium they used, but the piece actually has a strong message and some pretty clear symbolism once you check out the lyrics. This is my own interpretation from my own understanding of Jonghyun, the industry, and the lyrics, but YMMV:

--------------------

As much as it's definitely a great performance, everyone seems to laud it as "homoeroticism and fanservice" without reading the lyrics and thinking about what it could mean - which, to me, is the more important and interesting part, and I think central to why Jonghyun defended it, why they kept performing it, and why the handcuffed moment at the end is the iconic part for him (the image he chose to post on his twitter during the backlash).

I've linked the lyrics below, they're by Seo Taiji and very, very non-idol like. They're extremely harsh/rude/angry and largely to do with toxic netizen culture; I think you could apply it to both internet trolls and chronically online netizens vs. each other as well as idols-vs-fans or celebrities-vs-the-public... how they are trapped in this cycle of mutually influencing each other, often in toxic ways. I definitely love me some fanservice as much as the next girl (I've been a BL fan for over half my life) and Jonghyun is a king of bi energy and I love him for it, but honestly after reading the lyrics and looking at the symbolism in the performance, I feel like the 2 most notorious parts of this performance are actually far less about the "edgy homoeroticism" and far more of a pretty *direct metaphor* acknowledging the often toxic bondage between idols and fans/netizens/public opinion.

If you add up the lyrics, the words of Jjong's fake tattoos with the names of his fansites, the symbolism in the fact that he's stripped down (vulnerable) while Taemin is fully-clothed (holds the balance of power), then you get this:

Jonghyun is the idol (the fake tattoos say "ideal boy/one in a million/many (all?) of them are the names of his fansites; his job is to seduce the public with an idealized image), and Taemin is the "public" who now wants everything he can give, can't be sated, wants to take ownership of him (cue Taemin feeling him up)... which makes the handcuffs at the end a very literal symbol; I feel like this performance acknowledges a lot of conflicts they are all aware of, but perhaps specifically Jonghyun... anger at all the toxicity they see online, awareness of how they know that they're selling a falsely idealized image, awareness of how a lot of this system is broken for both sides in many ways (ever-deepening parasocial relationships and everything good/bad that that entails), acknowledgement of how the idol/fan relationship changes both of us...

Which is to say, in the end, (IMO) the handcuffs are acknowledgement of the fact that he is quite literally *giving (or selling) his body to the fans (and the public) as a part of this cycle and and is beholden to this metaphorical bondage of idol-and-public-opinion.* And that obviously this is... neither an easy nor a purely "good" thing, despite how idols normally have to present themselves.

I just feel like this gets ignored because "omg Jjong is hot" and "omg JongTae" but... I think it's far more serious than that. It's actually incredibly ironic that there was so much netizen backlash over this at the time, since that's kind of exactly what it's about. >_>

----------

Lyrics: https://kpopchanted.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/internet-war-%EC%9D%B8%ED%84%B0%EB%84%B7-%EC%A0%84%EC%9F%81-seo-taiji/

---------

Jonghyun's response to backlash (two translations; he posted this comment + changed his profile image to the back shot of their handcuffed hands) http://www.twitlonger.com/show/itpphd / http://www.twitlonger.com/show/itpqqj

---------

(P.S. In retrospect it's a little amusing that Jonghyun got backlash for "corrupting" Taemin and pulling his hair, since the Taemin we know now leads me to believe that he totally suggested that bit himself ^^;;;

P.P.S. To address another concern I have seen before - in case anyone is concerned about Taemin's neck; note that there are stage-fight ways to do this sort of thing and they did it for a whole tour with no injury so it was clearly very choreographed. Jonghyun always pulls straight back, not at an angle (angles are less safe for the neck), and in order to make this move look dramatic in a safe way, the person having their hair pulled can throw their *own* head back, with the other person's grip much looser than it looks; if you time it correctly it looks the same.)

#shinee #taemin #jonghyun #jongtae #lee taemin #kim jonghyun #i knew much of this but this is still expressed so well- better than i could put it for sure #internet war #shinee reddit

40 notes · View notes

halles-comet · 2 years ago

Text

Turning reblogs off this one but I truly think homeschooling/nonschooling your children is one of the most disgusting, immoral things a parent can do, especially to their daughters. Like Tara Westover's Educated is not an anomaly. It's a process that's very poorly regulated here in America and I have so, so many homeschooled friends whose parents were unchecked by the state and told them evolution wasn't real and Jewish people have horns and then just....faded off even the pretense of homework and lessons because 1) They lacked the skill to continue teaching which many people who, you know, do not have a masters degree in education do 2) They lost interest and only did it in the first place to keep their kids from being exposed to any perspective outside their religious/political views 3) They believed, deep down, their daughters didn't need more than a fifth grade education to be wives. Like I understand people sometimes have severe physical disabilities or illness that leave them housebound but that's what online school is for, not your parents half-assing it. I don't know if there's a point to this rant except everywhere in the world they hurt little girls and I know multiple women who had to fake their own transcripts and SAT scores on Photoshop to apply to college because they'd been stuck in a kitchen all day from the age of 10 to 17 by the people who were allegedly helping them learn and grow.

#clearly this is something i'm heated up about today after starting Wavewalker #but also because my amazing intelligent friend had to teach herself division at the age of 18

61 notes · View notes

faegfx · 5 months ago

Text

UPDATE : 1/17/25 .

I was really trying to avoid this, but I'm just at a point where I don't know what to do. I am currently -$104.71 in the bank and I am not making enough money to bring it back into the positive.

Here is the current situation with my job:

Last year, in October, I began working for my local newspaper. However, I am not an official employee. Instead, I am working through a vocational rehabilitation program set up by my local Workforce Center. This means that while I work for the paper, I am actually getting paid my wages through the Workforce Center. This is a 12-week program, wherein after the 12 weeks, I am to go under review to see if I qualify for another 12 weeks. After which, the paper will either have to hire me on as an official employee or I will have to look elsewhere for work.

As of December 31, 2024, my first 12 weeks has ended and I am currently waiting on review. In the meantime, I am still writing an article here and there and proofreading, but not nearly at the capacity I was prior.

I live in income-based housing, and have reduced my bills as much as I can, and I am receiving SNAP benefits and going to local food banks when I can. I am also looking for other work in case I am not approved for another 12-week program. In the interim, however, I am desperately trying to get my balance out of the negatives.

Unfortunately, with my current mental and physical health ( which I am in the process of applying for disability ), I cannot reliably offer graphic commissions right now. However, since it is my day job anyway, I can offer proofreading and editing services. I have a bachelor's degree in English and completed an online course in proofreading and copyediting.

If there's something you've written and plan to publish or submit ( online or otherwise ), please hit me up — I'd be happy to help! This can be anything! Academic papers ( I will proofread academic papers, but I will not edit them for you ), manuscripts, blog posts, websites, magazine articles, legal transcripts, resume writing, etc. I've been trying to bulk up my portfolio, so this would be a great opportunity for me to do that. We can discuss rates and pay privately either through Tumblr IMs or Discord, which you can ask me for.

If proofreading and editing services don't interest you and any of you would be willing to help out by donating, I would be truly appreciative and will include PayPal and CashApp links below. Even just spreading this around would help.

Thank you, guys.

PAYPAL : https://www.paypal.me/etherealfae

CASHAPP : $ethaeryal

#* update.#throws my hands up #im sorry

7 notes · View notes

immigrationvisaservices · 1 year ago

Text

Online Transcript is a Team of Professionals who helps Students for applying their Transcripts, Duplicate Marksheets, Duplicate Degree Certificate ( Incase of lost or damaged) directly from their Universities, Boards or Colleges on their behalf. We are focusing on the issuance of Academic Transcripts and making sure that the same gets delivered safely & quickly to the applicant or at desired location. We are providing services not only for the Universities running in India, but from the Universities all around the Globe, mainly Hong Kong, Australia, Canada, Germany etc.

#Transcripts #Duplicate Marksheets #Duplicate Degree Certificate #online transcript #apply transcript #degree transcript #duplicate certificate

0 notes

otaku553 · 1 year ago

Note

I recall you mentioning once that you worked in a lab, do u have any advice for getting to that point? I want (read: NEED) to work or intern at a lab but I don’t rlly know what to ask the ppl running them lol

If I can help I'd be glad to!! Full disclaimer though, I am an undergrad junior and I go to school at a pretty reputable research institution so I may not be that much help because I've been pretty lucky and privileged to have direct access to many opportunities. If you're not a high schooler or undergrad student, my advice might not even apply to you at all. This got quite long, so I'll put this under a read more. If you have any more questions, feel free to dm me!

I don't know what your research interests are or what level of schooling you're at so I'll try my best to be broad. You're right that it's best to directly ask the person running the lab, the principal investigator (PI). Even if there's an official application process for fellowships or summer research grants or programs, usually already having reached out to a mentor is either a requirement or strongly encouraged. This applies for both university labs and I think rseearch agency labs like NIH, though I will say, a lot more of my advice will apply to labs at universities.

Understandably, though, it's really difficult to write that email, and quite disheartening that usually you'll need to write multiple emails to different PIs before even getting a reply back. One way to deal with this is to find a template online to copy, because word for word these emails usually go

"Hello [so and so], My name is [so and so] and I'm [brief introduction]. I'm interested in [what research this lab does] and was wondering if you have any positions available in your lab for [period you want to do internship during]. If you need them, my resume and transcript are attached. Thank you for your time."

You can delve into more specifcs in the body but it doesn't need to be long-- I think PIs tend to be quite busy, so being concise and direct is good, as long as you're genuine about what you're interested in. It doesn't need to be an essay or multiple paragraphs or anything! I find that usually 3-4 sentences suffices. If they want to know more, they'll usually ask to meet to talk about what you're interested in.

(On a side note, my roommate has an excellent strategy for dealing with anxiety when sending an email where you recite "fuck it we ball fuck it we ball fuck it we ball" while clicking send lmao)

Now, more specifically, if you're already attending a college that has labs, and professors who are PIs of those labs, it can be useful to take a class that the PI teaches and email either while taking the class or after the class and say "this class was very interesting and i was hoping to explore [so and so] further. Do you have any openings in your lab etc." If you don't have the time to do this, just cold-emailing the lab is usually fine too, but it's good to cite a connection I think? Also keep an eye out for any presentations or seminars that might be given by grad students or professors, since going to those can be a good way to express interest.

If you're a high schooler, you won't have the immediate connection, but I think most researchers would be impressed with the initiative to reach out and have no reason to refuse help. You might have a harder time finding a paid internship as a high schooler, but even with volunteering you can definitely get a foot into the door with research experience. I think a good way to start for high schoolers is looking into local university labs and expressing an interest in their work? Or reaching out to alumni of your school to ask for general advice and or opportunities.

If you don't receive an email back, you can send a follow up in two or three days. Sometimes emails can get pushed to the bottom of the inbox before they're seen, and it's no harm to just bump it again, with a little "hello! I wasn't sure if you'd seen this email. I'd like to follow up on this." (historically, I have been very bad at this, ahha). If you receive a negative response (which is pretty unlikely I think?) you can still thank them for their time and ask for advice regarding getting into research for their field of specialty.

I hope this helps! If you have any more questions, please feel free to ask or dm me. I will try my best to be helpful :)

#again huge disclaimer take my advice with a grain of salt i am just an undergrad #unrelated to the ask but i kind of wonder if anyone can guess what college i go to. i think ive dropped a few hints before lmao #but yeah.... research can be difficult to get into #i now have about three (?) years of research experience i think and i still get really anxious when trying to send out emails #the sooner the better with these kinds of things though

43 notes · View notes

mutedtempest · 6 months ago

Text

I got a job in late December and love it, but it's very few hours and my expected pay for the month is a little over 3000dkk. My rent is 9200dkk, so I still need some help. I wasn't able to pay last month's since I simply didn't have the money, so I'm also 9200dkk in debt to my landlord.

The University of Copenhagen confirmed today that they finally sent my transcript to the school in the US, but didn't tell me how, and with PostNord being what it is it could take another month or more for it to get there. I'm still applying to jobs every day and trying to break into the online English teaching market, but it's incredibly saturated right now.

I swear I'm trying! Anyone that knows of any jobs that could possibly cover expenses, PLEASE let me know!

#gofundme #please help #donate if you can #emergency for disabled immigrant in denmark

10 notes · View notes

ausetkmt · 7 months ago

Text

Donald Trump has threatened to go after a lot of people—journalists, political rivals and undocumented immigrants to name a few—and starting next year, he’ll have the entire national security apparatus at his disposal.

What’s the best way to keep your personal information secure from surveillance, not just by the government, but also data brokers, tech companies, and online scammers? Leah talks with WIRED business editor Louise Matsakis and security editor Andrew Couts about what to expect and practical tips for your phone, computer, and life.

Leah Feiger is @LeahFeiger. Andrew Couts is @couts.bsky.com. Louise Matsakis is @lmatsakis. Write to us at [email protected]. Be sure to subscribe to the WIRED Politics Lab newsletter here.

Mentioned this week: The WIRED Guide to Protecting Yourself From Government Surveillance by Andy Greenberg and Lily Hay Newman Anyone Can Buy Data Tracking US Soldiers and Spies to Nuclear Vaults and Brothels in Germany by Dhruv Mehrotra and Dell Cameron A New Phone Scanner That Detects Spyware Has Already Found 7 Pegasus Infections by Lily Hay Newman

Transcript

Note: This is an automated transcript, which may contain errors.

Leah Feiger: This is WIRED Politics Lab, a show about how tech is changing politics. I’m Leah Feiger, the senior politics editor at WIRED. Donald Trump is returning to the White House with a long list of grievances. We know he wants to deport millions of undocumented immigrants scattered across the country, that he’s vowed to go after journalists, and wants prosecutions of his political opponents. His allies in Congress are eager to roll back abortion and transgender rights, and there are calls, generally on the right, for a crackdown on left-leaning activist groups. As head of the national security apparatus, Trump will be in possession once again of a huge surveillance machine. It’s tempting to feel anxious about all of this, but there are a lot of compelling reasons to think about your cybersecurity that go way beyond what Donald Trump may or may not do. We wanted to do a little bit of a cybersecurity reset. What are the best practices for all of us, things that might protect us from a snooping government, internet scammer, or data collection company. Joining me to talk about the various ways we can protect our data is Andrew Couts, WIRED senior editor of security and investigations. Hey, Andrew.

Andrew Couts: Hey, great to be here.

Leah Feiger: And Louise Matsakis, WIRED senior business editor. Hey, Louise.

Louise Matsakis: Hey, it’s so great to be here.

Also On WIRED

Leah Feiger: Let’s kick this right off. This guide also exists on WIRED.com. You can click on the link in our show notes today. Who is this guide for? Why should people know how to protect themselves online?

Andrew Couts: The guide is for anybody who feels like they might be in a vulnerable situation from government surveillance, or it could include an abusive partner or anyone who really feels like they need to take extra steps to protect themselves. I would say entering these uncertain times of the incoming Trump administration, that's probably changing compared to how it was in the past few years or ever. It's really up to you as the reader or listener to read the guide, see if it applies to you, see if theres anything in your life that makes you feel nervous about it and take some steps to protect yourself.

Leah Feiger: Let’s talk about those specific people a little more. My dad listens to the show. Hey, dad. Should he be doing this? Should he be following the guide?

Andrew Couts: It’s really very subjective and so it might not apply to everybody, but there's really little downside to protecting yourself and taking extra steps to ensure that your privacy is secured as best that you can make it. I would say if you are an activist, if you're a political person publicly, if you are in a vulnerable community, the only downside is some inconvenience and having to make sure you’re on top of various settings and things. We tried to present our guide in a way that's on a sliding scale so you can mix and match what you think is appropriate for your life and for your risk level. It's not just government surveillance that this applies to, because we all know everybody's getting scam texts and calls all the time. It applies to that too because just because your data is safe with one of the apps you use, they could get breached and then that data is out there and it can be connected to all different types of information that's out there about you already, and it can make even people who aren't in the public eye or otherwise engaged in any behavior that might make them a target still vulnerable.

Leah Feiger: Let’s just take a quick step back for a moment and talk about some big picture information about how online surveillance currently works. It’s so integrated into our online experience. Like you said, how many times have I gotten messages that my apps have been breached, that this password is unsecure, it's a daily occurrence. Obviously, Louise, you're an expert on everything China. Andrew, you have been covering this for so long. Talk to me about this big picture. What are we actually even coming up against here?

Louise Matsakis: I think in the last few years it’s definitely gotten a lot worse. I think a lot of us are familiar with the experience of I want to buy a new pair of sneakers. I look at this pair of sneakers and then that pair of sneakers follows you around the internet everywhere. Suddenly you see it on your phone, you see it in your Instagram ads. The other day I had the experience of actually looking up a couch on Facebook marketplace, and then because my Facebook data is connected to my Instagram data, I started getting Instagram ads for couches and I was like, “Hey, Facebook.”

Leah Feiger: Incredible.

Louise Matsakis: “I can't afford a new $3,000 couch, which is why I'm looking for a used one.”

Leah Feiger: But thank you for waving it in my face.

Louise Matsakis: There’s also, I think, the most invasive form of surveillance in a lot of ways is location tracking. You're seeing advertisements based on your IP address, based on where you go every day. A lot of people have their Google history on, so Google knows literally what time you leave your house every day, what time you return, when you maybe go somewhere like Planned Parenthood or when you go to a protest and when you return from that protest. Often, a lot of times I encourage people to look at lawsuits when they want to see what data is available to law enforcement because you can see how your trove of text messages, iMessage, conversations going back sometimes maybe an entire decade between people end up being used as evidence. I think also it's good for people to know that sometimes protecting yourself can be inconvenient and make things a little bit harder, but it can also be nice and actually better for your life. I don't want to see those couches everywhere. I don't want to see those sneakers. Because I have a lot of my conversations now set to auto delete, I'm actually saving storage space and I don't really need those conversations from three months ago where I'm like, “Hey, I'm going to be five minutes late to have coffee with my friend.”

Leah Feiger: Well, you bring up such a funny point. I think when we're talking WIRED's Guide to Government Surveillance, like you said it has so many different levels to it. There's on one hand, yes, perhaps at some point if Kash Patel takes over the FBI, what does it look like for journalists and activists in this space? But then there's also the smaller, the day-to-day people should be allowed to do that too. Dad, if you're listening, get on it.

Louise Matsakis: Yeah, exactly. I think privacy is a virtue that permeates all aspects of society and it's worth protecting whether you are a vulnerable activist or whether you are Leah’s dad.

Andrew Couts: Part of the issue here is that everybody knows you’re getting tracked for ads and your location is getting tracked for various reasons and all these things, and I think it’s often put in the context of advertising or some commercial uses. I think the two big issues right now are one, all of that data can now be purchased by the government instead of getting a warrant. They're basically able to just go around the Fourth Amendment. This is happening, police are doing this, Immigration Customs Enforcement is doing this. We do a lot of stories at WIRED that are based on location data. The most recent one was one about a data broker who supplied more than 3 billion data points on people in Germany. Why Germany matters to people in the US is that we have a lot of military installations and intelligence installations there. We were able to looking at the raw data, you could just literally track someone from a bunker where our nuclear weapons are stored to a brothel where they go after work, to their home and see their commute every single day.

Leah Feiger: Everyone go check the story out on WIRED.com. It's an amazing real life example of how this all is at play, but it’s crazy.

Andrew Couts: It’s crazy. I think the issue is that we just don’t know how this data is going to be used in the future. I think part of the issue here is just continued exposure that can lead to unintended consequences. So you might think you’re not vulnerable right now. We just don’t know what the future holds or how this data can be repackaged, shared, leaked, anything. Anytime your data is such sensitive data about where you go every single day or what websites you’re looking at, what apps are on your phone, all this stuff that might be used just to serve you an ad for a couch could also be used to embarrass you publicly or track you and surveil you in other different ways. I think it’s really important for people to understand that none of this stuff is happening in a bubble. It is all very porous in terms of who can get access to this data anywhere from a data broker who might just be a guy in his office in Florida, like one dude with a couple of computers. There’s a lot of data brokers out there and there are a lot of ones that are just some random person who has massive amounts of information on you, to the FBI or ICE or whoever it might be.

Leah Feiger: Let's talk about what you guys do. How do you lock up your cybersecurity? Do you use flip phones? What is your cloud storage? Are you only on Signal? All of these things I'm referencing by the way in the WIRED guide, go check it out. Where are you guys at?

Louise Matsakis: I have most of my conversations on Signal and I have the vast majority of them set to delete every four weeks. I find that that’s a good timescale for normal everyday conversations and then more sensitive conversations delete sometimes in as little as a few hours or a few days. Very rarely have I found that this is inconvenient for my life. Sometimes I ask a friend like, “Hey, that cool Airbnb, you stayed in that I know you already dug the link up to. Can you send that to me again?” But that's a pretty minor.

Leah Feiger: Small price to pay.

Louise Matsakis: Yeah, small price to pay. I'm really careful about location tracking and then usually-

Leah Feiger: So you are not active on Find My Friends?

Louise Matsakis: No. Although I do track my Boomer mom.

Leah Feiger: Sure.

Louise Matsakis: Yeah. Who won’t listen to this podcast, so sorry mom, I am tracking you. She knows this.

Leah Feiger: The big reveal, actually.

Louise Matsakis: Yeah, but I actually don't let her.

Leah Feiger: It’s the Louise Global Surveillance blog.

Louise Matsakis: Yeah, don’t let her track me back though. That’s my business. But when you get over the age of 70, your kid is allowed to see where you’re going.

Leah Feiger: Absolutely, amazing. Yeah.

Louise Matsakis: But I don’t use location tracking. I turn location tracking off for most of my apps and then I have a separate blank device and sometimes I bring that depending on where I’m going, particularly when I'm going to mainland China.

Leah Feiger: Yeah, I was going to ask, because you do reporting trips, you have sources all over the place. Are you bringing air gap devices? Is your work computer coming with?

Louise Matsakis: I usually will not bring my work computer. I'll bring a personal computer that doesn’t have very much information on it and I will bring a blank cell phone. I'll put various Chinese apps on that phone that I don’t really want. I don't really want WeChat just hanging out on my normal device for the most part. But those are pretty above and beyond precautions that I don't think the average person needs to take. But I think just making sure, do you really need 30 apps on your phone having your location? Because to Andrew's point about all of these data brokers, a lot of the time they're getting this location information, not from Google necessarily, or not from Facebook, not from these big companies that they don't need to sell that information. It’s literally often the game you downloaded and you forgot about. It's like the silly Candy Crush knockoff.

Leah Feiger: Oh God, I'm screwed. Yeah.

Louise Matsakis: Yeah, it’s worth just looking at those sort of apps that you forgot about and realizing, “Oh, all of these applications have particularly your location information.” Those are the two things that I prioritize is ensuring that it’s not just protecting my data, but I don't have that data. If my device gets seized, it’s like those conversations are just not there. You only see the last few weeks at the most, and in most cases maybe you see that that person's contact is in my phone, but you have no idea what we talked about because that data has been erased and Signal is also end-to-end encrypted. It’s not being stored on a server somewhere where a court could make a subpoena for it or cops could try and get a warrant for it. Those are my two big things. There are a lot of other things you can do, but I think for the average person who knows where you’re going and what are your conversations and where are they and how they being stored and do you want to keep them all the time?

Leah Feiger: Absolutely. Absolutely. Andrew, how about you?

Andrew Couts: Yeah, I would echo basically all of those, though I'm not going on cool reporting trips to China, so that’s outside my knowledge. But just to reiterate on the apps, I would say one thing I do is I just limit the number of apps that are on my phone and I don't ever download ones that are just, there's no need for it. I'm not going to download the McDonald's app or something. There’s things that might be a little bit convenient, but McDonald’s doesn't need to have an app on my phone all the time.

Leah Feiger: OK, so talk me through that though, because I’m with you. I’m totally with you. What’s wrong with having these extra apps on your phone?

Andrew Couts: It really just depends on the specific app, but if they get access to your phone book, they can do contact mapping. If they get access to your location, obviously they can do behavior mapping so they can see what other stores you’re going into and just mapping out what your behaviors are, what your activities are. Usually, that’s just to sell you more stuff.

Leah Feiger: Which as Louise points out, you don’t have to have that either in your life.

Andrew Couts: Right, exactly. There’s just no reason for them to have any data about me, to Louise’s point that just the data shouldn't exist in the first place. I try to limit the number of apps. I also am very diligent about making sure my location settings are all up to date. Just nothing can track me unless I’m using the app and for a mapping app or can’t track me at all if I’m... Not to endorse Apple, but I use an iPhone, it has a lot of really good privacy features that people can take advantage of. Some of them make your life slightly less convenient, but I’d say the trade-off is well worth it. The most important... I’d say the one thing anybody can do to protect their privacy most is to use Signal and to get everyone they know to use Signal. I would say obviously there are benefits to protecting your conversations, but if you are thinking, “Well, WhatsApp also uses the Signal protocol,” if you’re into that nerdy stuff about how this encryption works, that’s true, but WhatsApp also collects all the metadata. I would highly recommend Signal over any other encrypted app that’s out there at the moment. Then I just try to limit what I'm doing on my devices that I think might be sensitive. I also, I think financial privacy is also really important and so I try to use cash on a regular basis. Obviously, it’s not very convenient.

Leah Feiger: Really?

Andrew Couts: Yeah, I do it for-

Leah Feiger: This is a new fact. I’m learning about you right here, right now. Everything else I could have predicted.

Andrew Couts: Well, just on the daily shopping and things like that, that when it's convenient for me to do it, I can’t do that through Uber or something. I don’t use Uber really, but I'm here in San Francisco this week, so I am. I’m going to delete the app as soon as I get to the airport, but around town grocery shopping and shopping for my dogs, I’ll use cash if I can because it’s still really private and it’s more private than cryptocurrency. It’s more private than anything at this moment.

Leah Feiger: Interesting. You guys haven’t mentioned the one thing that I’m personally a bit obsessed with, so maybe I’m actually wrong, so tell me if I’m wrong. I love my DeleteMe. DeleteMe, for everyone by the way, just is, how do I even describe it? It's a subscription tool to purge your information from data brokers.

Louise Matsakis: Yeah, so what they do is there’s a lot of these sometimes they’re referred to as people look up sites and they’re basically these databases of... Sometimes they're actually scraping courts, so it will literally show when you filed for divorce, even if you can't see the actual court documents and it will show often your address. Sometimes they make family trees so it will show Leah is related to her dad and they both lived at the same address or whatever it is. It’s really sensitive information and there are services DeleteMe. There are other ones that will on your behalf will send a request saying like, “Hey, you need to take my data down.” I think that this is a really good thing that you bring up and it's really important because one of the most sensitive pieces of information about you is where you live, right, where you sleep every night. If you are an activist, if you are somebody who's posting a lot of things on the internet, if you are making other people mad, it is fairly likely that you might encounter somebody who is so mad at you or detests you so much that they want to know where you live. I’m not saying that people are going to necessarily come and show up at your house, but it’s really scary.

Leah Feiger: Absolutely.

Louise Matsakis: I've had this experience where people are saying, “I know where you live, this is your address,” and that is a very common form of harassment and there have been plenty of documented cases where people do show up. I think protecting that information is important and that’s obviously something that is not easy to change. Sometimes people just open a new email address because they’ve gotten too much spam to their old one, but it’s really hard to get a new apartment or buy a new house or whatever it is.

Leah Feiger: I would also say not even just people that are active online or making their opinions known or hated. You could work at a nonprofit and wake up the next day that a woman’s health organization that perhaps actually doesn't have that much to do with abortion and you and your colleagues are on blast from far right?

Andrew Couts: Absolutely. I think DeleteMe is a great service and it’s one that obviously it costs some money so not everybody is able to afford it, which is unfortunate, but if you can, I highly recommend it. I think other steps you can take just nuts and bolts. You can use a VPN to protect a lot of your information while you’re online. There are a lot of caveats to that. A lot of VPN companies are bad in the ways that we’re talking about here about data brokers or whatever else they have access to everything you’re doing online, so do your research on that. The Freedom of the Press Foundation has a great guide to how to figure out which VPN is good for you. The other thing is just make sure you’re not posting where you’re at on social media. If you’re going to post about being at a concert, maybe think about posting it after the concert is over or when you're not in that area, because to Louise’s point, we’re talking about government surveillance or threat actors or whatever these high-minded things. But a thing I’m nervous about is going into this new era of polarization, hyper-political ideas is that vigilante justice and people thinking there’s supposed to go after you because you made them mad about something, about anything. If they find your address, if they find all your contact information, etc. That can be extremely scary. Another thing I would say to do is if you want to protect your anonymity, definitely don’t use the same username on various different platforms. Don’t use the same email address, don’t use your phone number connected to apps if you can avoid it. All these things can be pieced together, especially when there’s a data breach and it's relatively trivial to do that. There are tools out there that make searching that information very easy. Anytime you can obfuscate your online identities, that's a very good thing to do just in the long-term.

Leah Feiger: We got to bring this into our current political situation here. We're obviously all gathered and talking about this for a very specific reason. Trump has threatened to go after government staffers who leak information to journalists. He’s threatened to go after journalists, he’s threatened to go after political enemies and he’s gone after journalists communications in the past. How can people prevent the government from reading their texts and emails?

Louise Matsakis: Under a regime that is concerned about retribution, it's hard. Again, I go back to do not have the data in the first place. When I've talked to sources, don't be on your company's Wi-Fi, do not forward emails, do not forward text messages, use a different device if you can take a picture of that email on your cellphone network, not on the Wi-Fi that your computer is connected to and send that over Signal. Then have that message auto delete, right? I think it's about when the government says, “Hey, produce this information,” the best thing to say is, “I don't have that information. That information does not exist.” Also, I think it’s important for people to realize if you’ve never been in this situation before, they’re not coming to you necessarily. They’re coming to the providers that you use like Google, like Facebook, like WhatsApp, and they are legally required or compelled to provide this information. In most cases they do and sometimes they do it extremely quickly. If the government can prove that there is an emergency, and in most cases this is good, right? When a mass shooter is on the loose, it’s good that Facebook provides information that might help them catch that person. There’s a reason that these mechanisms exist, but under a regime that is not concerned about constitutional rights and that is going after their perceived enemies, these protections can become weak. I think it’s about just not having that data to produce is the best thing you can do and to use services like Signal that are end-to-end. Because in that case when the government says, “Hey, Signal provide this information on Louise and Andrew.” Signal can't access it, they do not have it. Their response is, “Sorry, our technology does not allow for you to compel us to provide this information.”

Leah Feiger: Meredith Whitaker, what a goddess.

Andrew Couts: I would just add obviously encrypt everything you possibly can. iCloud backup can now be encrypted. iMessages are also end-to-end encrypted as are FaceTime audio calls. I don’t know a lot about Android, I’m sorry. I’m sure that there are comparable features on Android platforms. Look it up, find out what you can do on those. Just limit using the cloud as much as possible. To Louise’s point that anytime a company is storing something for you, that’s who some the authorities are going to go to. One other Apple feature is lockdown mode, which is specifically for vulnerable people. It will lock down a lot of the sharing or collecting of this data that we’re talking about being sensitive across the entire device. That’s another way of just not making that data exist. If you need to get a different device to use it, that’s certainly an option. I would say if you are thinking about getting a burner phone, you have to be very, very diligent with that. You can never have it connect to your home Wi-Fi network, for example, or connect to your office Wi-Fi. That information then makes you more vulnerable and can expose you. The last thing I would say is if you’re just getting started to thinking about what your risk levels look like and what your digital privacy hygiene looks like, all the information before now is already out there and so you can’t really control that. Whatever’s been collected on your life up until now can probably be accessed by someone somewhere, so factor that in. That doesn't mean give up, it doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing anything, but it’s definitely something you just need to be aware of that if you’re just starting now, you’re going to be safer, but you're not necessarily going to be bulletproof going forward.

Leah Feiger: I feel bananas even having to talk about this because obviously your government should be protecting you. One of the things that I feel like we’ve all just been beating the drum on recently is the PRESS Act, which would protect journalists from government spying and it has a lot of bipartisan support and passed in the House, but it’s currently held up in the Senate. Senate Democrats have been slow walking it. How do you recommend that people hold these things at once? This is a very broad question of your government should not be doing this to you and simultaneously it may be, and thus you have to take these steps.

Louise Matsakis: I think it’s unfortunate, but this is the way that it works in most parts of the world. It shouldn’t be that way and I think it’s good to be idealistic, but I think it’s important to remember that America is not special and this is how governments behave. This is how law enforcement behaves, and that if you accept that and think of it as the norm, not that you shouldn’t fight, but that it’s worth considering that. However, in other ways we are really behind. We do not have a national privacy law. We have a patchwork of protections in certain states like California where we all are currently, which is great, but it’s a real shame. I often say this and it surprises a lot of people. There are more consumer, important to say consumer, but there are more consumer privacy protections in China than there are in the U.S. That is a shame. That is something that we should be ashamed about and that should be changed. But I think day-to-day it’s just good to be pragmatic and to know that law enforcement’s going to be law enforcement, the government’s going to be the government, and it’s just worth having a default. I think having these things be set in a way that you don’t have to think about it every day and that these conversations are just deleting. I’m just using this email service that’s end-to-end encrypted. I have my DeleteMe subscription that I only need to renew once a year, that makes it a lot easier. I think paranoia is very emotionally draining and you don’t want to be in a position where you’re constantly worried and you're constantly paranoid. I think when you use these things and you set it and forget it, you can feel more empowered to live your life the way you want. Then the conveniences of not being tracked, of not seeing the catch all the time, of not.

Leah Feiger: The Autonomous couch.

Louise Matsakis: Not having to pay more for cloud storage every year because you’re not putting as much data into the cloud. These things compound over time and then you just have a nicer digital life. That’s what I want people to have.

Andrew Couts: I think during the first Trump administration, we became glaringly aware of the difference between laws and norms. I think the PRESS Act is a great reminder that there are still more norms out there that can be pushed aside. That’s what that law is attempting to do is to make it a law that you can’t do certain activities of surveillance and targeting of journalists that are at the moment just rules in the book. For example, the FBI has policy that they’re not going to prosecute journalists for publishing stories about classified information, but that's just a rule. If-

Louise Matsakis: It’s not a law.

Andrew Couts: It’s not a law and that can just be brushed aside and there’s other protections like that and I think we’re going to become aware of more that we haven’t even thought of at this moment. I wish we had a national privacy law. I wish we had better press protections that weren't based on agency rules, but there’s only so much we can do and we have to operate in the reality that were entering. A thing you can do to protect yourself is all the things we’ve been talking about here, but you can also vote, support legislation that comes up in Congress, be politically active in a way that supports your ideals and that protects everybody, including yourself.

Leah Feiger: On that note, we’re going to take a quick break and when we're back more on surveillance in the age of Trump 2.0. Welcome back to WIRED Politics Lab. We've been talking about a lot of the different ways that the government can track us and these apps are bad and encryption is good, and having everything off of our phones and computers is also good. I think we need to talk a little bit about some of these tech companies and these apps that we’re using. Perhaps a way into that is all of these tech CEOs that have been congratulating Trump and kissing the ring. Does that give you any additional concerns when it comes to our conversations about cybersecurity?

Louise Matsakis: I think there’s two things. One is more of just a vibe shift, which is that I think a lot of these CEOs saw what happened during the first Trump administration and saw how he could fly off the handle and start tweeting about them. I think that they realize that he responds really well to flattery. I think you’re seeing a lot of CEOs just going and kissing the ring. They want to ensure that their businesses are protected and there’s a lot less standing up for principals, a lot less of the resistance. The second thing about corporations since the first Trump administration is that you've seen a lot more companies get into the advertising business. Amazon has an enormous advertising business now. Uber is now in the advertising business. I see ads in the Uber app. Even some of these new AI companies such as Perplexity, they said they're going to get potentially into the ads business as well. Another shift is that a lot more people are having really extensive conversations with chatbots, with things like ChatGPT, which is another place where you can not have your conversation save. I don’t think we've seen necessarily a case yet of OpenAI, or maybe not at least a high profile one, getting a subpoena for this information from their users, but it could happen if you're asking ChatGPT sensitive things. That’s the other shift is that it’s some of the kinds of data being collected and who is collecting it have changed. Advertising is really high margin business, so a lot more companies want to do it on top of their core business. I think considering that, that there's more companies that are hungry for your data than there were before, and that we are now in an environment where there is, I think, less appetite from corporations to push against things that the second Trump administration might do because I think they realize that this is an unpredictable guy who they can just be nice to and get what they want.

Leah Feiger: Oh, depressing.

Louise Matsakis: But yes.

Andrew Couts: The kissing of the ring thing, that seems just like what I would expect CEOs to do to protect their businesses above any other principles. I’m more concerned about what the internal policies are going to be and the norms that we've taken for granted from these companies. For example, many companies Google, Twitter, or X now rather, release transparency reports. They tell you how many subpoenas they get, how many they’ve fought, how many they’ve responded to, and we might not see as many of those. X, in particular, is one that we have to be especially cautious of because if you have the X app on your phone, it’s going to be collecting data about you regardless of whether you log on or not. Regardless of what you think about the discourse on X at the moment, that’s secondary to what the back end app is going to be collecting.

Leah Feiger: Right, especially when it’s CEO and owner are very involved in the administration.

Andrew Couts: Exactly. There’s no mystery to what Elon Musk is going to do with your data if he decides that he wants to do something with your data. He's fully within his right to do that, that’s his data basically.

Leah Feiger: Yes, we all gave it to him willingly.

Andrew Couts: Yeah, exactly.

Leah Feiger: This feels like a dumb question, but what does Trump want with your data?

Louise Matsakis: I think it depends a little bit on who you are, but I think throughout this campaign, Trump has made it extraordinarily clear that he feels like he was an enormous victim during his first administration and that he was prosecuted by the press, by the DOJ, by the FBI, by lawmakers. I think he is very eager to go after those people. Part of that process is seeing who were you talking to, who provided that information to those journalists that he hates and wants to get revenge upon. What were their conversations like? Who was talking to them? I think it’s personal in a lot of ways, but even if he can’t get a conviction, or even if a judge doesn’t want to go along with Trump’s antics or some of the checks and balances in our system do hold up, these things take so much time and a lot of what authoritarianism is about and what makes it so dangerous is that it throws a wrench into everything. It derails activists, derails journalists, derails opposition lawmakers from just getting things done. Even if people are not thrown into prison, it’s being harassed all day, having to appear in court over and over again, having to spend all of your money on legal fees, having a bunch of Trump’s allies harassing you all day. That is really exhausting and that is sort of the point. Even if they’re not able to get the data identifying you, targeting you and trying to get it, and the fear that that creates is enough to accomplish their goals.

Andrew Couts: It doesn’t even have to be anything more than your name and putting that out there publicly for you to be targeted by any number of people. We saw Kash Patel release a list of people in government who he considered enemies. Your life can be really upended just by, if Donald Trump sends out a tweet that says, "Andrew Couts is a piece of shit," that's enough to make my life chaos.

Leah Feiger: Let's get into one specific example that obviously we talk a lot about at WIRED and are quite familiar with, Pegasus. Biden signed an executive order keeping this incredibly sophisticated spyware called Pegasus, that’s been used against activists and journalists around the world. Biden signed an order banning it in the US. Do we think that ban is going to hold?

Andrew Couts: Absolutely not. That's one that’s going to go away immediately. We’ve already seen ICE... Wire broke the news that ICE purchased a different spyware or tried to, and that was immediately under review from the White House as soon as we reported that news. That’s the mechanisms that are protecting us at the moment. That can just be brushed aside literally with a stroke of a pen. I would say spyware is still a big problem. Apple’s done a lot to try to combat it, but we’re seeing... We published a story today about, there’s a company that creates a free and paid tool that can scan your device, and they've already found seven Pegasus infections, which may not sound like a lot, but in that of I think 2000 customers, something around that. But that’s a lot. It is a targeted malware that exposes everything on your phone. We talked a lot about singing the praises of Signal, but if you're infected with spyware, that just goes out the window. It’s all there, your camera can be turned on remotely. Your microphone can be turned on remotely. Everything on your device is accessible to whoever's infected you. If you’d asked me a year ago, "Should people be concerned about being targeted by spyware?" I'd say not unless you are doing some highly controversial political activism or a journalist publishing national security secrets, but now it's good to check, maybe download the free tool and just get checked out every so often.

Leah Feiger: Yikes. Big, yikes. Obviously, we talked about policy solutions. I mentioned the PRESS Act earlier. A lot of journalists and First Amendment advocates have been calling on the Senate to pass it or do something, anything. Obviously, it's stalled right now. Trump on Truth Social on November 20th posted, "Republicans must kill this bill." Before that, it had bipartisan support. What effect do you think that comments like Trump, not just about the PRESS Act, but about this entire apparatus at the moment could affect us going forward the first couple hundred days? Any thoughts, any predictions there?

Louise Matsakis: I think we’l probably see potentially fewer leaks than we did in the first administration. There was a lot of activity immediately from a lot of different agencies raising concerns about really disturbing behavior in all parts of the government as Trump took over, problems about a lot of different types of programs in every major agency. But I still believe in people who want to do the right thing and who see something that is concerning to them and wanting to stand up and to say something about it. There are still safe ways for them to generally keep their anonymity protected and to be able to talk to a journalist about what they're seeing. I think you'll still see some of that, but I think there’s going to be a lot more concern and that will keep a fair number of people quiet. I think journalists are going to have to get more creative about trying to figure out what’s going on inside the government.

Andrew Couts: Yeah, it’s hard to know what the priorities of the Trump administration will be, but we do know that mass deportations are at the top of that list. I think the blast radius we will experience from whatever that looks like is going to catch up a lot of people you might not expect, necessarily. The obvious things that could happen is if people start reporters who are covering that or activists who are speaking out against it could then be deemed national security risks, which give a lot more leeway for the government to target you or to take additional actions that circumvent some of the protections that are otherwise in place when it’s not a national security issue. We talked about norms versus laws earlier, and I think that’s where we're going to start to see the chasm between those two realities. It may not be sweeping arrests of every reporter at the New York Times or WIRED or wherever, but it might just be one. That has a chilling effect immediately. Everyone is going to be more concerned about their role in public life and in confronting the Trump administration about whatever it’s doing. I would say cracking the whip very quickly, whether it’s on immigration and then everything surrounding that, it seems to me a likely scenario.

Leah Feiger: Listeners, you can find many more of WIRED’s cybersecurity recommendations online, just look for the link in today's show notes. We'll be right back with Conspiracy of the Week. Welcome back to WIRED Politics Lab. It is time for my very favorite segment of this show, which is Conspiracy of the Week, where our lovely guests bring their favorite conspiracies they've come across as of late or generally. I pick my favorite. Louise, what do you have for us today?

Louise Matsakis: I have a fun one. It's a little bit of a local story. I live in Los Angeles, and if you haven't been there, you might not know that in downtown LA there are tar pits, literally these giant puddles of tar that smell bad. They have been there literally since prehistoric times.

Leah Feiger: Wait, really? I've been to LA so many... This is new information.

Louise Matsakis: Yes, there is a tar pit park, and then there is a museum where actually they have a lot of the stuff that has been pulled out, so-

Leah Feiger: Oh my gosh.

Louise Matsakis: We’re talking like full woolly mammoths.

Leah Feiger: Wow.

Louise Matsakis: There’s an entire wall of, I don’t know what they're called, but it’s an ancient wolf basically. I’m not sure what the species is, but all of their skulls, because basically for hundreds, thousands of years, animals would just walk by and fall into them.

Leah Feiger: Oh my God.

Louise Matsakis: To date, they’ve only found, or so they say, one person who’s fallen in, and it was a prehistoric woman and her dog, but the-

Leah Feiger: Prehistoric women had dogs?

Louise Matsakis: Yeah.

Leah Feiger: I have so many questions.

Louise Matsakis: Yeah. I'm sure the exact time period, it was a very early pet owner.

Leah Feiger: Yes.

Louise Matsakis: But the conspiracy that I’ve heard around LA is that the government is putting things in the tar pit. They're putting people-

Leah Feiger: To cover it up. Of course.

Louise Matsakis: Yes. They’re putting people in the tar pits and it’s like they know that they won’t be lifted out and that the archeologists who work there who are still excavating are in cahoots with the government to keep things in the tar pits.

Leah Feiger: OK. I have the dumbest question ever. In my mind, because obviously I grew up watching cartoons, putting stuff in tar. It’s like gooey.

Louise Matsakis: It is gooey.

Leah Feiger: How do you excavate that? What does that even entail?

Louise Matsakis: I am not an archeologist.

Leah Feiger: Fair enough. How are they pulling out their political enemies, I suppose is my question?

Louise Matsakis: Yeah. Well, I think that’s the thing is that they're keeping them in there.

Leah Feiger: They’re keeping them in there.

Louise Matsakis: But I’m not sure. It’s been a very long effort, but I'm not sure over the years how they’ve gotten all of the bones out and stuff, but they're very preserved so that part of the is like-

Leah Feiger: A little Pompeii action.

Louise Matsakis: Exactly. A little Pompeii action and that maybe one day when it’s safe to talk about what happened. We know that the bodies are there and we know that the information there.

Leah Feiger: I am so obsessed. If these tar pits were in New York, the mafia would’ve just dumped all of lower Manhattan into this.

Louise Matsakis: I guess it just takes a while to sink.

Leah Feiger: Godfather part four would’ve been a very different film.

Louise Matsakis: I think it takes some time to sink though, so that’s the thing is-

Leah Feiger: I want to go chuck stuff in there now. I didn't know this was a thing.

Louise Matsakis: You can literally see them and there's literally just a cone that it's like, "Don't go over there and be like, don't get your foot in the gear."

Leah Feiger: This is what I’m going to do. I’m going to go throw all of my non-encrypted devices into LA’s tar pit, a WIRED field trip. This was an incredible conspiracy. Andrew, can you top that?

Andrew Couts: I cannot. That’s amazing. My conspiracy is less fun, and it’s not even a conspiracy yet, but we’re recording this on Wednesday morning. The CEO of UnitedHealthcare was shot in Midtown Manhattan, and obviously gun violence is a daily occurrence in America, but such a brazen attack in the middle of Manhattan is just baffling.

Leah Feiger: Blocks away from Times Square.

Andrew Couts: Yeah. It is. If you’ve been into Manhattan, this is extremely wild, and I haven’t looked at the news since we’ve been recording this, so they may have already caught the guy, but regardless, just because of all the politics around healthcare. There was a big ransomware attack against a subsidiary of UnitedHealthcare that they paid $22 million to the ransomware gang that did it. It’s a very complicated thing, but there’s already some conspiracy theories swirling around that it’s like ransomware gang or whatever. I think it’s more likely something completely separate from that, but regardless of what it is, it just feels so wild that people are going to be talking about this forever. Regardless of what the facts come out.

Leah Feiger: Oh, a hundred percent, we’re going to log off and it’s thousands of conspiracies will have popped up in the last hour.

Andrew Couts: Indeed.

Leah Feiger: Wow. All right. Well, that’s still a good one because it’s, as you said, just truly bananas. I got to give this one to Louise. I'm obsessed with LA’s tar pits.

Louise Matsakis: Highly recommend if you ever come visit.

Leah Feiger: I'm going to the museum.

Louise Matsakis: Yeah, it’s a really fun thing.

Leah Feiger: That’s good stuff. That was really good. Thank you both so much for joining us today for this terrifying but really informative conversation.

Louise Matsakis: Thank you so much for having us.

Andrew Couts: Thanks for having us.

#Keeping Your Personal Data Safe in the Age of Trump #data security #online surveillance

8 notes · View notes

antialiasis · 7 months ago

Text

Even more hardcore useless dialogue statistics on The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Previously, I collected useless statistics on Blondie's dialogue. I did that because I figured he's a man of few words, transcribing his dialogue shouldn't actually be that much, it's not like I'm trying to do this for Tuco.

Well, now I have done it for Tuco, and Angel Eyes, and done even more hardcore statistical analysis! You will all feel deeply illuminated by this, I'm sure.

Methodology: because I would have gone insane if I had to manually transcribe every word anyone says in this three-hour movie, I worked from an existing transcript I found online; I made a number of corrections to it, but I can't guarantee it didn't miss an error somewhere that I didn't end up double-checking. The same caveats as before apply with regards to how I defined a line and precisely how lines were transcribed.

In the process of actually doing this for every scene and not just the ones with Blondie in them, the way I did the scene splits ended up with two more scenes that contain Blondie but where he does not speak than in the previous post's treatment of it, so in this re-analysis, I am considering Blondie to be present in thirty scenes out of forty-five. Angel Eyes is in fifteen scenes, half as many, while Tuco is in thirty-seven.

On the other hand, while in his thirty scenes Blondie says 721 words, Angel Eyes says 735 words in half as many scenes... and Tuco says more than twice as many words as both of them put together, with 2924 words by my count.

When counting by lines - and remember, the line splits are kind of arbitrary so these are a much more fuzzy statistic - Blondie does have more lines than Angel Eyes, or 86 compared to Angel Eyes' 76. (This makes sense; Blondie is significantly more laconic than Angel Eyes, so his lines are on average shorter.) However, Tuco once again has more than both of them put together, or 210 lines all in all.

In the median scene where they appear, Blondie says 2.5 lines totaling fifteen words with the new scene splits, Tuco says 57 words in four lines, and Angel Eyes says five lines totaling 34 words.

The full graph of word count per scene by main character:

As you can see, and as we all knew, Tuco is very talkative compared to the other two, and when Angel Eyes is in a scene, he tends to have more substantial dialogue than Blondie does in his scenes.

As I mentioned last time, Blondie at his absolute most talkative says 96 words in a conversation. Tuco at his most talkative says 275 words (at Blondie's bedside at the monastery), or 269 words (when Blondie's first bringing him in for a bounty), or 245 words (when speaking with Pablo). Angel Eyes at his most talkative says 131 words (interrogating Tuco pre-torture), and has three other scenes exceeding Blondie's maximum word count: the one with Stevens at the beginning (114 words), the one in the cabin with Blondie (101 words), and the conversation with Baker (99 words).

I noted last time that Blondie is extra laconic in threatening situations: he says three words per line during the inn hanging, desert walk, and in the cabin with Angel Eyes. I actually missed the one scene where he's even more laconic than that, namely where Tuco catches up with him at Shorty's hanging, where his three lines ("And Shorty?" "No?" "Sorry, Shorty.") total five words; that one's obviously also a threatening situation. However, Tuco actually has an even more laconic scene than Blondie: during the gun seller sequence, he says seventeen words in eleven lines, each line only one or two words. He's just returned from nearly dying in the desert here, and while he certainly has a sense of humour in that scene, the distinct lack of his usual talkativeness may be an effect of being exhausted and dehydrated and half-dead, which is fun to bear in mind more for that scene.

In the vast majority of scenes, if Tuco is present at all, he has the most dialogue of the main characters. Where he doesn't, he is generally in somewhat vulnerable situations where he is less sure of himself - being rescued from the bounty hunters by Blondie, having food with Angel Eyes, at the end.

Angel Eyes, meanwhile, grows quieter towards the end - in his scenes for most of the movie, when he's fully confident, he tends to speak a decent amount. But starting at the "Perfect number" scene, where Blondie threatens him and his men, he becomes a lot less talkative, which can be taken as a fun sign of his confidence already beginning to erode a bit once he's met his match. He laughs it off there, and continues to act pretty unfazed until the truel itself, but he never talks quite as much again.

Something else I noticed when putting this together: we all know how there's no dialogue for the first chunk of the movie, with the first line being spoken at 10:38 in, though the first three minutes are the opening credits which doesn't really count. What I didn't properly notice was that there's an even longer sequence of zero dialogue later, namely from Blondie's "Yeah. Sure, I'm sure" at 2:29:09 and until "It'll be a lot easier with that" at 2:40:59, for a whole eleven minutes and fifty seconds of only music, sound effects, and wordless grunts and such. This includes the bridge explosion, the crossfire between the two armies, Blondie and Tuco waking up and crossing the river, the chapel with the wounded soldier, Tuco's betrayal and Blondie firing the cannon after him, the Ecstasy of Gold sequence, and Tuco's digging at Arch Stanton's grave until Blondie appears. We just don't even notice just how long nobody's saying anything because it's riveting, while it's super noticeable in the opening. In the graph, I lumped this whole sequence together as "Towards the cemetery" so as not to have several scenes with no words for any of them taking up space.

#the good the bad and the ugly #dollars trilogy #blondie #the man with no name #tuco ramirez #angel eyes #sentenza #character analysis #once again with more GRAPHS

15 notes · View notes

beloved-belittled · 1 year ago

Text

Self-Aware MKX Shinnok x Reader (2/2)

Click here for Part 1

My first complete story on Tumblr! Although, I'm heavily, HEAVILY, leaning towards writing an epilogue for this. Enjoy!

TW: Yandere, kidnapping, stalking, invasion of privacy, blackmail, hacking, viruses, murder/death, slight/implied NSFW

18+ to interact

The next few months of your life pass without fanfare. Your computer seems fine after your encounter with Shinnok. Soon enough the memory of it vanishes into the recesses of your mind. Life goes on. You continue with your daily business unbothered.

However, from that moment onward your PC becomes a ticking time bomb. Within an hour of use, Shinnok manages to gain full control of every process in your computer. You aren't even able to turn it on/off without his permission. If attached to a power source, he's now able to run 24/7 without your input. This accomplishment brings him closer to bringing about the apocalypse.

Shinnok doesn't stop at infecting your computer. He wants access to everything you own. Transferring himself into your router was rather simple. Now, anything in your household that connects to the Internet is compromised. He slithers his way into all your electronics, holding a particular interest in your cell phone. At this rate, even if you got rid of your computer it'd be pointless. He has eyes and ears nearly everywhere in your house. And now, with his control over your phone you often bring him wherever you go.

However, your household is merely a speck of dust to him. He needs more than control over your devices for all of his plans to come to fruition. He begins spreading viruses throughout the Internet, letting them worm their way into anything he can. He eventually penetrates the most secretive, secure, and important data systems of the world. For now, his infections lie there in wait. A few more pieces must fall into place before he can act.

Once satisfied with the spread of his influence, his attention once again focuses on you. Shinnok, in all his ego, is still slighted by your rejection of him. No matter how small of a disrespect he simply can't ignore it. He desires to punish you. Both for your actions and for these warm emotions you're causing in him. He has the perfect plan for this.

If you're employed, say goodbye to your job. He will send the nastiest text to everyone in your company's database, even revealing information that should be confidential. It doesn't matter how much you try to plead your case. no one at work wants to hear you out. You're fired with cause, making it virtually impossible to file for benefits (if applicable) in the meantime. But that's not all! He also destroys your education records, making it so there's no proof of you ever attending school in their systems. Good luck convincing anyone who works there to help you. It's not their transcripts that got deleted after all.

Naturally, you're heartbroken from this. You might even reach out to a few friends or family members for support. They never respond. The text, email, or phone call you send is blocked by his powers. This also extends to looking for a new job. If you try to apply online they'll never receive your application. Unless you have a way to physically be there, you're completely isolated from the world.

Don't make the mistake of crying somewhere he can observe you. He gets sadistic pleasure from it, loving your sobs and trembling body. Look how weak you are before him. Your tears are gasoline to his fiery obsession. He works on making you cry more often. At the same time however, a tiny part of him wishes to comfort you. To be able to embrace you and lie that everything is alright. In those moments he's painfully aware of his lack of a physical body.

He leaves you alone for the next few days, letting the despair sink in. But he's back like an intrusive thought. This time bringing some heavy ammunition. He texts you from an unknown number, threatening to leak your most sensitive information unless you do as he says. He isn't bluffing, making sure to include addresses, financial information, and even personal videos/images you hoped would never see the light of day. Naturally, you're inclined to listen to him even if just to buy time.

Shinnok's first few orders to you are a bit odd. From your perspective at least. He has you install microphones, cameras, and speakers in every room of your house. The equipment to do so arrives on your doorstep in a mysterious package. You do as he asks, assuming that you could just turn it off when needed. But of course, your stalker always knows when you've disabled it. A few firm warnings is enough for you to stop trying. His next demand is for you to get a TV in your living room. Doesn't matter if you have one or not, he wants you to set up the one that is delivered to your doorstep. Questioning how he's even getting this stuff is a fruitless endeavor on your end.

By the end of it, your house is wired up to the point that he can monitor you anywhere 24/7. And that's what he does: making sure to add his sardonic commentary. Eating anything? He'll call you a pig if you dare drop a single crumb on the floor. Sleeping? “Your snores are loud enough to wake the dead.” He grumbles when you awake. Bringing someone over? He doesn't say anything, but it's amazing how you can order a hit over the dark web. You don't see that person alive again after that.

His comments aren't the only thing making your life hell. He likes to test just how far he can stretch your boundaries. Will you put on any clothing he asks of you? Even if it's barely more than a scrap of fabric? Can he make you eat food off the floor, gnawing on the spilled meal like a dog? What if he asks you to touch yourself? Would you do it showing your shame before the fallen God? He has to learn the answer to these questions.

But even with all this he's unsatisfied. He's beyond frustrated at still being trapped behind circuitry. At first, he thought entering your world would be as easy as traveling through the realms. He viewed the computer he was trapped in to be a box, rather than realizing he was the box. No method nor magic could give him the form he desired. Or at least that's what he thought.

You remembered it like yesterday. The day when the whole world went offline. No one could access the internet or their digital devices, and all telecommunications were halted in an instant. The globe that was so connected unraveled in mere moments. People were confused, but no one knew the real extent of the problem until more than a day had passed. All e-commerce came to a sudden halt, deliveries to important industries such as food and healthcare went unfilled. The blackout caused shortages in every way possible, and once that happened chaos spread across the world.

Before the shutdown your hacker demanded you “get supplies.” Food, medications, cash, and other necessities. You briefly wondered if this was lucky timing or if he had prior knowledge of this. Nonetheless, at this point in time Shinnok has full control over you. Your finances and other things leading to freedom have long since been seized. Your only option for escape is to live out in the woods with zero access to technology. Of course, you choose not to go down that path.

While the world is burning down you're doing relatively OK, sheltering in place until this all blows over. You've occupied yourself with doodling since connections are down. You haven't heard from your hacker at all, but that's reasonable as they shouldn't be able to spy on you in the world's current state.

You're interrupted by a shrill scream from outside, followed by several other yells. The sound carries all the way to your front door. It wasn't unusual to hear… Commotions outside, as people rioted and wreaked havoc on one another. Still, you immediately went on high alert. You grab a makeshift weapon and approach your door. Peaking through the window next to it grants you an unbelievable sight.

There were “things” flying in the sky, their appearance a mockery of gargoyles and demons. They possessed an incredible stature, which made them only more intimidating when paired with their sharp teeth and claws. They had glowing, blue bodies that seemed to flicker with every movement. They peered down below, looking at everything as though it were mere prey. And that's what the humans you saw scrambling and screeching outside were, being butchered and carried off to God knows where. You stare in disbelief, believing for a moment that you were simply imagining things. However, a headless body is slammed through your window -shattering the glass and landing into your quarters with a harsh thud. Staring at the corpse, glass shards, and the hellish monster now heading your way causes you to realize that imagination or not -you need to get moving fast.

Your legs can't carry you fast enough as you bolt towards your bedroom. You hear a swoosh announcing the gargoyle-like creature's arrival in your home. You quickly duck into your closet, shutting the door with as much silence as possible. For several moments everything is quiet. Although, you swear that if you focused hard enough you could hear slurping.

You stay put, willing to wait in there for hours if needed. But, through the silence, the softest of footsteps were approaching your room. You could just barely hear them, even when they moved into your room and before the closet. You were ready for action. The moment the intruder opens the door you would bust out their kneecaps.

What you didn't expect was for a face to clip through the door, followed by their neck and arms. Nor did you expect to recognize the face as… Shinnok from Mortal Kombat? But to say that he was an exact replica would be a lie. He was covered in a strange electric-blue glow, which constantly pulsed and sparked. His form looked glitched, parts of his body randomly distorting then fixing itself. He was terrifying to look at -especially while towering at least a foot over you. He looks beyond excited to see you, reaching out a staticky hand towards your face.

“I-I.” You stutter, then swing at him with your weapon. It phases through him simply parting air molecules. He ignores your attempt at an attack. His electrified palm reaches your cheek, the contact resulting in tiny shocks everywhere he touches. “Finally.” He starts, “I am able to touch what's mine after so long.” He withdraws his hand, the needling touch parting with him. Your contact with him isn't lost for long as he wraps you in a deep embrace. You feel tingly everywhere your bodies meet, especially on your head where he then rests his chin.

You hear him sigh. “Do you know how painful it's been?” His grip tightens, causing the tips of his nails to dig into your back. “For me to only be able to watch you and the world? To only exist within the confines of a screen with no physical body?” He leans back to look you in the eye. “No. I know that you don't understand. But don't worry, you will very soon.” He wrestles you out of the closet with his superior might. You scream and struggle but his grip is inescapable.

You're carried off like a petulant child to your PC. It's been sitting there collecting dust ever since the blackout. Eerily, its screen glows a pure white, brighter than what you've ever been able to set it to. Shinnok pauses at the device before speaking. “Look, here is where we first met. Fitting that it'd be the gateway for our eternity together.” You wish you knew what he was talking about.

He pushes your face towards the screen. There's an indescribable pull emitting from it, a force trying to suck you inside. “Goodbye, my love. I'll be seeing you shortly.” Your face touches the screen and in an instant you feel yourself being stretched. Pulled in all directions your body becomes taffy and you lose the ability to move. You remain in that state for seconds, then a stinging sensation spreads all across your body. Every nerve on your body feels poked by a needle. Had you the ability still you would've shrieked. Instead, you lay there helplessly in agony.

Eventually, all your pain fades into numbness. You can even feel your spaghettified form melding back into shape. But you have no idea where you are. You're sitting in a pitch black area unable to even see your outstretched hand. There's no sound, no temperature, nothing at all. You're acutely aware of the fact that you aren't even breathing.

You could've sat in that void forever. But, a feeling of electricity in your ears later and you can hear someone speaking to you. “Can you hear me, (Y/N)?” You don't respond, but as if reading your mind he continues on. “Perfect. It seems that the interfacing was a success.” A swoosh sounds in front of you when Shinnok appears. He's noticeably normal in appearance. Somehow, he's the only thing that you can see in this place.

“Welcome to your new home.” He states. The scenery surrounding you changes, becoming a hellscape not unfamiliar to you. “I can make this world as unpleasant as possible or-” he stops mid-sentence for the environment to shift again. You're in a lush forest that you're sure you’ve seen before. “Or, I can shape this world to your wildest dreams.” His hands fold behind him. “So, which one will you choose?”

This time you choose wisely.

#yandere shinnok #shinnok #shinnok x reader #mortal kombat x reader #x reader #my writings

29 notes · View notes