#distributed systems design

[projectchampionz]

Explore These Exciting DSU Micro Project Ideas

Explore These Exciting DSU Micro Project Ideas Are you a student looking for an interesting micro project to work on? Developing small, self-contained projects is a great way to build your skills and showcase your abilities. At the Distributed Systems University (DSU), we offer a wide range of micro project topics that cover a variety of domains. In this blog post, we’ll explore some exciting DSU…

[philologicalbat]

one of the things no one tells you about turning 30 is that the universe will randomly assign you a designated 22 year old. that 22 year old is yours to steward through early adulthood. yeah you may still feel like an enormous child, but congrats! you now have to answer your 22 year old’s questions about relationships and careers and life. if you fail your 22 year old, you’re going to feel like absolute fucking shit. good luck!

[kpgreenengineering]

Learn about the fundamentals and components of electrical substations. This comprehensive guide covers types, functions, and benefits of substations in transmitting and distributing electricity.

[besten-india]

Water distribution system in factories by civil design consultants

Civil design consultants play a key role in planning water distribution systems for factories. They design efficient networks to ensure the proper flow and pressure of water, considering the factory’s size, layout, and water demands. Systems include storage, treatment, and piping to optimize resource usage.

[akrnd085]

Mastering System Design Part 3: Exploration of Key Concepts

In the intricate landscape of distributed computing, understanding and addressing the inherent fallacies is crucial for creating robust, efficient, and scalable software systems. This comprehensive guide delves deep into the common misconceptions identified by L. Peter Deutsch, explores pivotal system design trade-offs, and offers strategies for building resilient distributed systems.

[bitnest]

In the current rapidly evolving digital currency market, decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms are redefining the shape of financial services with their unique advantages. Bit Loop, as a leading decentralized lending platform, not only provides a safe and transparent lending environment, but also opens up new passive income channels for users through its innovative sharing reward system.

Personal links and permanent ties: Create a stable revenue stream One of the core parts of Bit Loop is its recommendation system, which allows any user to generate a unique sharing link when they join the platform. This link is not only a “key” for users to join the Bit Loop, but also a tool for them to establish an offline network. It is worth noting that offline partners who join through this link are permanently tied to the recommender, ensuring that the sharer can continue to receive rewards from the offline partner’s activities.

Unalterable referral relationships: Ensure fairness and transparency A significant advantage of blockchain technology is the immutability of its data. In Bit Loop, this means that once a referral link and live partnership is established, the relationship is fixed and cannot be changed. This design not only protects the interests of recommenders, but also brings a stable user base and activity to the platform, while ensuring the fairness and transparency of transactions.

Automatically distribute rewards: Simplify the revenue process Another highlight of the Bit Loop platform is the ability for smart contracts to automatically distribute rewards. When the partner completes the circulation cycle, such as investment returns or loan payments, the smart contract automatically calculates and sends the corresponding percentage of rewards directly to the recommender’s wallet. This automatic reward distribution mechanism not only simplifies the process of receiving benefits, but also greatly improves the efficiency of capital circulation.

Privacy protection and security: A security barrier for funds All transactions and money flows are carried out on the blockchain, guaranteeing transparency and traceability of every operation. In addition, the use of smart contracts significantly reduces the risk of fraud and misoperation, providing a solid security barrier for user funds. Users can confidently invest and promote boldly, and enjoy the various conveniences brought by decentralized finance.

conclusion As decentralized finance continues to evolve, Bit Loop offers a new economic model through its unique recommendation system that enables users to enjoy highly secure and transparent financial services while also earning passive income by building and maintaining a personal network. Whether for investors seeking stable passive income or innovators looking to explore new financial possibilities through blockchain technology, Bit Loop provides a platform not to be missed.

[market-insider]

Warehouse Racking Market and its Vital Role in Supply Chain Optimization

The global warehouse racking market size is expected to reach USD 12.41 billion by 2030, registering a CAGR of 4.1% according to a new report by Grand View Research, Inc. The demand for warehouse racking is expected to witness significant growth owing to the rising awareness of the benefits of systematic storage and easy material handling processes.

Warehouse racks manufactured using steel are popularly used in automotive, retail, manufacturing, and other applications as it is robust and durable. The warehouse racks manufactured using steel exhibit superior durability. The cost of steel-based warehouse racks is low, and these products can be constructed for normal floor units and high-rise shelving systems.

The product manufacturers operating in the market include Hannibal Industries, Georgia-Pacific, Dematic, SSI Schaefer, EMRACK INTERNATIONAL, and others. These market players introduce warehouse racking systems incorporated with advanced technologies such as sensors, robotics, and others. The use of the aforementioned technologies helps in making warehouse operations more efficient.

Expansion of various application industries such as automotive, manufacturing, retail, food and beverage, and others across the globe is projected to promote the demand for storage of goods. Rising demand for warehouse space in order to store and gain easy access to the products is anticipated to propel the need for optimizing the warehouse space.

The warehouse racking market players offer collision-resistant, earthquake-resistant, clean, wire mesh racking systems focusing on the safety and protection of the workplace. The manufacturers are inclined towards warehouse management software systems and other automation techniques to minimize the retrieval and processing time in the warehouse and the control systems enabling the workers' safety.

For More Details or Sample Copy please visit link @: Warehouse Racking Market Report

Warehouse Racking Market Report Highlights

The growing demand for cantilevers in warehouse racking is likely to drive its growth at a CAGR of 5.0% over the forecast period. The use of cantilever racks is expected to emerge as one of the fastest-growing product segments driven by the ease of storage and retrieval of products with varying weights, sizes, and lengths. These racks exhibit an easy installation and assembly with only a few components needed to build the product storying and holding structure

The selective pallets segment is expected to reach USD 5.8 billion in revenue by 2030, owing to its superior selectivity in warehouse applications. Selective pallets are the most common and widely used racking system and are expected to witness high demand from various application industries such as retail, food & beverages, automotive, and others. The system provides efficient use of space and quick access to the load or product stored using any type of forklift. However, the system requires numerous aisles for higher selectivity, making it a low-density option when compared to the other type of racking system

The retail segment is anticipated to dominate the market accounting for 34.35% of the market in 2022. The retail application segment accounts for the largest share and acts as vital to the overall growth of the market owing to the increasing number of warehouses, online retail, supermarkets, hypermarkets, food retails, and others. Increasing demand of product multi-channel fulfillment, sales cycles, and storage density requirement of large volume products are the key factor that is adding significant growth to the overall market for warehouse racking

The U.S. accounted for a market share of 65.3% of the North America warehouse racking market in 2021. The economy caters large e-commerce market, superior infrastructure & automation facility, and a highly skilled workforce which is further expected to make the same economy more favorable for growth. Timely movement of goods and a cost-effective racking system is the major factor driving the market for warehouse racking in U.S.

Innovators majorly deal with introducing robotics, software, and remote-controlled processes and automation in the racking systems. The market witnessed the acquisition of robotics startup companies by some of the prominent players. It enhances the product portfolio of the companies and enables them to offer automation

[hvac-eng]

Design Procedures for Cooling-Only Systems: Detailed Airflow Calculation Methodology

Technical Deep Dive: Airflow Calculation Methods for Cooling-Only Systems Following our 8-step methodology for designing cooling-only HVAC systems, this technical supplement provides detailed insights into the critical airflow calculation methods essential for Step 3: Calculate Required Zone and Space Supply Airflow Rates. Understanding these calculation approaches enables engineers to select…

[yawnderu]

Simon wasn't given to you by the cat distribution system. No, far from it— he's like a stray that you fed once, not caring about how roughed up and tough he was, always being patient with him and giving him love even when he was covered in dirt.

Before you even know it, he's in your house, getting comfortable and acting casual about it, like it's all meant to be that way. He doesn't admit his feelings, but he takes you out on February 14th (just a random Wednesday), gives you flowers and sweets (to be nice), and takes you out to your favorite restaurant (because you're hungry).

It became a routine for him to wrap his arms around you whenever you're both alone, raising a thin eyebrow at you whenever you shot him a questioning look.

Your closet has a space designated for his things that just seems to be getting bigger and bigger each time he comes back after weeks of going missing every once in a while, no explanation given other than a souvenir from a different culture each time placed into your hand.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Penguin Random House, AI, and writers’ rights

NEXT WEDNESDAY (October 23) at 7PM, I'll be in DECATUR, GEORGIA, presenting my novel THE BEZZLE at EAGLE EYE BOOKS.

My friend Teresa Nielsen Hayden is a wellspring of wise sayings, like "you're not responsible for what you do in other people's dreams," and my all time favorite, from the Napster era: "Just because you're on their side, it doesn't mean they're on your side."

The record labels hated Napster, and so did many musicians, and when those musicians sided with their labels in the legal and public relations campaigns against file-sharing, they lent both legal and public legitimacy to the labels' cause, which ultimately prevailed.

But the labels weren't on musicians' side. The demise of Napster and with it, the idea of a blanket-license system for internet music distribution (similar to the systems for radio, live performance, and canned music at venues and shops) firmly established that new services must obtain permission from the labels in order to operate.

That era is very good for the labels. The three-label cartel – Universal, Warner and Sony – was in a position to dictate terms like Spotify, who handed over billions of dollars worth of stock, and let the Big Three co-design the royalty scheme that Spotify would operate under.

If you know anything about Spotify payments, it's probably this: they are extremely unfavorable to artists. This is true – but that doesn't mean it's unfavorable to the Big Three labels. The Big Three get guaranteed monthly payments (much of which is booked as "unattributable royalties" that the labels can disperse or keep as they see fit), along with free inclusion on key playlists and other valuable services. What's more, the ultra-low payouts to artists increase the value of the labels' stock in Spotify, since the less Spotify has to pay for music, the better it looks to investors.

The Big Three – who own 70% of all music ever recorded, thanks to an orgy of mergers – make up the shortfall from these low per-stream rates with guaranteed payments and promo.

But the indy labels and musicians that account for the remaining 30% are out in the cold. They are locked into the same fractional-penny-per-stream royalty scheme as the Big Three, but they don't get gigantic monthly cash guarantees, and they have to pay the playlist placement the Big Three get for free.

Just because you're on their side, it doesn't mean they're on your side:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/09/12/streaming-doesnt-pay/#stunt-publishing

In a very important, material sense, creative workers – writers, filmmakers, photographers, illustrators, painters and musicians – are not on the same side as the labels, agencies, studios and publishers that bring our work to market. Those companies are not charities; they are driven to maximize profits and an important way to do that is to reduce costs, including and especially the cost of paying us for our work.

It's easy to miss this fact because the workers at these giant entertainment companies are our class allies. The same impulse to constrain payments to writers is in play when entertainment companies think about how much they pay editors, assistants, publicists, and the mail-room staff. These are the people that creative workers deal with on a day to day basis, and they are on our side, by and large, and it's easy to conflate these people with their employers.

This class war need not be the central fact of creative workers' relationship with our publishers, labels, studios, etc. When there are lots of these entertainment companies, they compete with one another for our work (and for the labor of the workers who bring that work to market), which increases our share of the profit our work produces.

But we live in an era of extreme market concentration in every sector, including entertainment, where we deal with five publishers, four studios, three labels, two ad-tech companies and a single company that controls all the ebooks and audiobooks. That concentration makes it much harder for artists to bargain effectively with entertainments companies, and that means that it's possible -likely, even – for entertainment companies to gain market advantages that aren't shared with creative workers. In other words, when your field is dominated by a cartel, you may be on on their side, but they're almost certainly not on your side.

This week, Penguin Random House, the largest publisher in the history of the human race, made headlines when it changed the copyright notice in its books to ban AI training:

https://www.thebookseller.com/news/penguin-random-house-underscores-copyright-protection-in-ai-rebuff

The copyright page now includes this phrase:

No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner for the purpose of training artificial intelligence technologies or systems.

Many writers are celebrating this move as a victory for creative workers' rights over AI companies, who have raised hundreds of billions of dollars in part by promising our bosses that they can fire us and replace us with algorithms.

But these writers are assuming that just because they're on Penguin Random House's side, PRH is on their side. They're assuming that if PRH fights against AI companies training bots on their work for free, that this means PRH won't allow bots to be trained on their work at all.

This is a pretty naive take. What's far more likely is that PRH will use whatever legal rights it has to insist that AI companies pay it for the right to train chatbots on the books we write. It is vanishingly unlikely that PRH will share that license money with the writers whose books are then shoveled into the bot's training-hopper. It's also extremely likely that PRH will try to use the output of chatbots to erode our wages, or fire us altogether and replace our work with AI slop.

This is speculation on my part, but it's informed speculation. Note that PRH did not announce that it would allow authors to assert the contractual right to block their work from being used to train a chatbot, or that it was offering authors a share of any training license fees, or a share of the income from anything produced by bots that are trained on our work.

Indeed, as publishing boiled itself down from the thirty-some mid-sized publishers that flourished when I was a baby writer into the Big Five that dominate the field today, their contracts have gotten notably, materially worse for writers:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/06/19/reasonable-agreement/

This is completely unsurprising. In any auction, the more serious bidders there are, the higher the final price will be. When there were thirty potential bidders for our work, we got a better deal on average than we do now, when there are at most five bidders.

Though this is self-evident, Penguin Random House insists that it's not true. Back when PRH was trying to buy Simon & Schuster (thereby reducing the Big Five publishers to the Big Four), they insisted that they would continue to bid against themselves, with editors at Simon & Schuster (a division of PRH) bidding against editors at Penguin (a division of PRH) and Random House (a division of PRH).

This is obvious nonsense, as Stephen King said when he testified against the merger (which was subsequently blocked by the court): "You might as well say you’re going to have a husband and wife bidding against each other for the same house. It would be sort of very gentlemanly and sort of, 'After you' and 'After you'":

https://apnews.com/article/stephen-king-government-and-politics-b3ab31d8d8369e7feed7ce454153a03c

Penguin Random House didn't become the largest publisher in history by publishing better books or doing better marketing. They attained their scale by buying out their rivals. The company is actually a kind of colony organism made up of dozens of once-independent publishers. Every one of those acquisitions reduced the bargaining power of writers, even writers who don't write for PRH, because the disappearance of a credible bidder for our work into the PRH corporate portfolio reduces the potential bidders for our work no matter who we're selling it to.

I predict that PRH will not allow its writers to add a clause to their contracts forbidding PRH from using their work to train an AI. That prediction is based on my direct experience with two of the other Big Five publishers, where I know for a fact that they point-blank refused to do this, and told the writer that any insistence on including this contract would lead to the offer being rescinded.

The Big Five have remarkably similar contracting terms. Or rather, unremarkably similar contracts, since concentrated industries tend to converge in their operational behavior. The Big Five are similar enough that it's generally understood that a writer who sues one of the Big Five publishers will likely find themselves blackballed at the rest.

My own agent gave me this advice when one of the Big Five stole more than $10,000 from me – canceled a project that I was part of because another person involved with it pulled out, and then took five figures out of the killfee specified in my contract, just because they could. My agent told me that even though I would certainly win that lawsuit, it would come at the cost of my career, since it would put me in bad odor with all of the Big Five.

The writers who are cheering on Penguin Random House's new copyright notice are operating under the mistaken belief that this will make it less likely that our bosses will buy an AI in hopes of replacing us with it:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/09/ai-monkeys-paw/#bullied-schoolkids

That's not true. Giving Penguin Random House the right to demand license fees for AI training will do nothing to reduce the likelihood that Penguin Random House will choose to buy an AI in hopes of eroding our wages or firing us.

But something else will! The US Copyright Office has issued a series of rulings, upheld by the courts, asserting that nothing made by an AI can be copyrighted. By statute and international treaty, copyright is a right reserved for works of human creativity (that's why the "monkey selfie" can't be copyrighted):

https://pluralistic.net/2023/08/20/everything-made-by-an-ai-is-in-the-public-domain/

All other things being equal, entertainment companies would prefer to pay creative workers as little as possible (or nothing at all) for our work. But as strong as their preference for reducing payments to artists is, they are far more committed to being able to control who can copy, sell and distribute the works they release.

In other words, when confronted with a choice of "We don't have to pay artists anymore" and "Anyone can sell or give away our products and we won't get a dime from it," entertainment companies will pay artists all day long.

Remember that dope everyone laughed at because he scammed his way into winning an art contest with some AI slop then got angry because people were copying "his" picture? That guy's insistence that his slop should be entitled to copyright is far more dangerous than the original scam of pretending that he painted the slop in the first place:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/artist-appeals-copyright-denial-for-prize-winning-ai-generated-work/

If PRH was intervening in these Copyright Office AI copyrightability cases to say AI works can't be copyrighted, that would be an instance where we were on their side and they were on our side. The day they submit an amicus brief or rulemaking comment supporting no-copyright-for-AI, I'll sing their praises to the heavens.

But this change to PRH's copyright notice won't improve writers' bank-balances. Giving writers the ability to control AI training isn't going to stop PRH and other giant entertainment companies from training AIs with our work. They'll just say, "If you don't sign away the right to train an AI with your work, we won't publish you."

The biggest predictor of how much money an artist sees from the exploitation of their work isn't how many exclusive rights we have, it's how much bargaining power we have. When you bargain against five publishers, four studios or three labels, any new rights you get from Congress or the courts is simply transferred to them the next time you negotiate a contract.

As Rebecca Giblin and I write in our 2022 book Chokepoint Capitalism:

Giving a creative worker more copyright is like giving your bullied schoolkid more lunch money. No matter how much you give them, the bullies will take it all. Give your kid enough lunch money and the bullies will be able to bribe the principle to look the other way. Keep giving that kid lunch money and the bullies will be able to launch a global appeal demanding more lunch money for hungry kids!

https://chokepointcapitalism.com/

As creative workers' fortunes have declined through the neoliberal era of mergers and consolidation, we've allowed ourselves to be distracted with campaigns to get us more copyright, rather than more bargaining power.

There are copyright policies that get us more bargaining power. Banning AI works from getting copyright gives us more bargaining power. After all, just because AI can't do our job, it doesn't follow that AI salesmen can't convince our bosses to fire us and replace us with incompetent AI:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/11/robots-stole-my-jerb/#computer-says-no

Then there's "copyright termination." Under the 1976 Copyright Act, creative workers can take back the copyright to their works after 35 years, even if they sign a contract giving up the copyright for its full term:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/09/26/take-it-back/

Creative workers from George Clinton to Stephen King to Stan Lee have converted this right to money – unlike, say, longer terms of copyright, which are simply transferred to entertainment companies through non-negotiable contractual clauses. Rather than joining our publishers in fighting for longer terms of copyright, we could be demanding shorter terms for copyright termination, say, the right to take back a popular book or song or movie or illustration after 14 years (as was the case in the original US copyright system), and resell it for more money as a risk-free, proven success.

Until then, remember, just because you're on their side, it doesn't mean they're on your side. They don't want to prevent AI slop from reducing your wages, they just want to make sure it's their AI slop puts you on the breadline.

Tor Books as just published two new, free LITTLE BROTHER stories: VIGILANT, about creepy surveillance in distance education; and SPILL, about oil pipelines and indigenous landback.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/10/19/gander-sauce/#just-because-youre-on-their-side-it-doesnt-mean-theyre-on-your-side

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

[reasonsforhope]

"Seventh graders at Thurgood Marshall Middle School in Rockford, Illinois are learning about STEM — but they’re also learning about real-world challenges.

The students have taken on a new project: assembling “solar suitcases” to help bring electricity to schools in Uganda’s Bidi Bidi Refugee Settlement, which is home to 270,000 South Sudanese refugees.

It’s an initiative led by We Share Solar, a nonprofit that provides science and technology learning projects for students that then go on to benefit other students in low-income areas of the world. 

The project introduces middle schoolers to fundamental electrical concepts, like positive and negative charges, voltage, amps, and wiring, ultimately producing a 12-volt DC solar power system that will be distributed among the refugee community.

“We’ve learned many things like positives and negatives, amps, volts, all that stuff, and how to wire stuff together,” Pratham Mehta, one of the Thurgood Marshall students, told WIFR News. 

“We’re taking all this stuff for granted, and other countries don’t have all this stuff, like electricity.”

The suitcases will bring electricity to 40 schools in the refugee settlement, which provide education to over 12,000 students. They are designed to be easily transported (thus the suitcase design), which makes them ideal for off-grid locations, like a refugee camp.

The panels in the suitcase collect sunlight and harness the energy in a built-in battery. It can then provide power to up to five light bulbs for 50 to 60 hours a week. Depending on the capacity of the system, it can also help power small electronics like phones or radios.

For people in the Bidi Bidi settlement — one of the largest refugee settlements in the world — this kind of power can make an enormous impact.

In fact, We Share Solar has deployed over 1,000 suitcases to “energy-scarce locations” across the world, with more than 500,000 students and teachers benefitting from the power they provide.

“The We Share Solar education program serves youth twice,” Hal Aronson, co-founder of the organization, said, “first as an educational experience for American youth and second as a renewable power and lighting system for youth in parts of the world that lack electricity.”

Along with connecting students to learning opportunities, the organization ensures each device is tested by a professional to ensure it is built to withstand energy demands. Then, the suitcases are installed by trained partners in destination countries, and students and teachers alike learn about the new clean energy technologies they have implemented.

At the start of the 2024 school year, the We Share Solar program was implemented in 13 Illinois schools, training educators in the curriculum and setting up the project across the state.

“This is just the beginning,” a Facebook post from We Share Solar states. “These passionate teachers will now guide their students in building solar cases, providing a hands-on STEM experience with real-world impact.”

-via GoodGoodGood, January 16, 2025

[carionto]

The terrifying sound of silence

"Where is the Human?"

A question that incites dread across the Galaxy. And no greater when the Human in question is an engineer.

For weeks after her arrival aboard the Coalition joint exploration vessel Ulmanar's Resilience, the Human Jenna had been pestering everyone about the technical specifications, tolerances, build schematics, design philosophy, power outputs, and countless other microscopic details.

At first everything seemed normal, Humans are known to be curios, especially the technically minded ones, and her job would entail managing parts of the vessel's systems, so everyone was as helpful as they could.

Then Jenna started tinkering.

'Optimizing' is how she described it.

Admittedly, most of her modifications resulted in marginal improvements to energy distribution and mechanical motion efficiency. Although the fact the power reactors started to make audible noise was... unusual, but the readings said everything was fine, and the fact a day passed without explosions put everyone at ease - this was partly why a Human engineer was brought along in the first place.

During a short stop at a supply station before our first descent onto an uncharted planet, Jenna was the first to rush off with several cargo drones in the direction of the shipyard district. She was the last to return mere minutes before the scheduled departure, all covered in dust and oil, and the drones straining under the weight of everything she had procured.

"Don't worry, it's gonna be awesome." she declared.

It had been a while since our training and none of us had encountered other Humans in the meantime, so all of us had forgotten to immediately be alarmed by those words and question everything she was doing.

The following weeks of transit to our destination were marked by a severe lack of Jenna interactions or even sightings. The shuttle bay was a mess of disassembled craft, loose parts flung about, and sparks and rattling noises coming from the bowels of whatever was going on.

Unbeknownst to us, for the idea itself was ludicrous, Jenna was only within the vessel half of the time during this period. The other half she was in her spacesuit tinkering with the exterior of the vessel. Laser cutters and cold welding, not to mention the vacuum of space, make for a very silent work environment.

Perhaps it was instinct for most of us to avoid the confusing actions of a predator species descendant, as once we arrived to the designated planet, we learned we only had two surface shuttles left. Out of sixteen.

"This baby can land now!" Jenna happily said.

Confused beyond measure, we asked: "What do you mean 'this baby?"

"The ship, you know, Ulmanar's Resilience. We can land the whole thing now instead of doing this boring shuttling down thing. Plus the terraforming bot wouldn't fit in a shuttle anyway."

"The what?" our confusion continued.

"Yeah, we're gonna terraform this planet, right? That's what I got from the briefing back before joining you guys." she explained with innocence in her eyes.

There must have been some miscommunication, but the work had been done, and as far as our own technicians (who were scolded harshly for not keeping track of such grand changes to the entire vessel) did confirm that, as far as their understanding of mechanics and physics went, Ulmanar's Resilience can now indeed endure descent and commence takeoff from up to a 6G world.

So I guess that's what we're doing now. Preliminary surveys from past unmanned missions had suggested this world was once in the past and potentially now habitable again, and we suppose the Humans had decided to just set that in motion before more detailed analysis had occurred.

"Oh yeah," Jenna interjected, "if it turns out this place is, like, super dangerous and a threat to the Galaxy if we accidentally wake something up, I modified one of the scanning dishes to be a deep drill laser. Two hours of firing it at the core of the planet and it'll go boom."

...

"The planet, not the laser dish. That will explode if left on for more than three hours."

...

[starseongs]

one of my friends said “maybe he likes ateez” so now i’m like fuck maybe that Is it!! maybe their siren voices have lured him in and bc i can’t stop fucking playing their music he WONT LEAVE😖

please i am just trying to watch ateez videos can this guy leave me alone for one night 😭

[papoochu]

With the introduction of Nathalie's father in the latest episode, I decided it was time to finally put my interpretation of him on paper so I can catalog how my perception of him changes. Below are some design notes, backstory, and character study comments. (Warning: it's a lot) Of course, spoiler alert for my fic!

Background:

Victor = reference to Frankenstein

Serdtseva = derived from the word "heart" in Russian

Gave Nathalie “Sancoeur” as a way to distance himself + as a cruel joke

Born circa 1930 in Leningrad to a lower-middle-class family.

Family had connections to the Russian Orthodox Church.

Early Life & Imprisonment:

His early experiences during the Holodomor sparked outrage at the government

Arrested in the late 1940s during the Leningrad Affair while a university student for:

Openly practicing religion in an anti-Orthodox Soviet state.

Expressing interest in banned Western philosophy and literature.

Possible possession of prohibited texts or being reported by a peer.

Sentenced to several years in the Gulag system.

Endures brutal conditions.

Experience deeply affects and distorts his worldview.

Post-Stalin Release & Academic Career:

Released after Stalin’s death in 1953 during the Khrushchev Thaw.

Quietly reinstated into academic life as a professor.

Outwardly reformed; secretly continues dissident activities.

Smuggles and distributes censored literature (e.g., Solzhenitsyn, Western political theory, Orthodox theology).

Involvement in Samizdat & Tamizdat:

Participates in Samizdat (underground self-publishing of banned texts):

Used typewriters with carbon paper to make multiple copies.

Circulated materials within academic circles—dorms, staff offices, cultural clubs.

Involved in Tamizdat (smuggling works abroad to be published).

Rise and Fall in Soviet Society:

Gains influence through connections with:

Other Gulag survivors.

Ideologically flexible bureaucrats.

Rehabilitated intellectuals.

Later accused of sexual misconduct involving minors.

Truth unclear; rumors spread in both academic and dissident communities.

Under increased scrutiny, he resigns and vanishes from Soviet public life.

Exile and Life in France:

Possibly uses false claims of Jewish ancestry or religious affiliation to escape.

Refugee channels assisted by HIAS, Amnesty International, or the Catholic Church.

Smuggled out via Austria or Italy; resettled in France.

Reappears in Lille:

Poses as a Soviet defector and intellectual.

Possibly tolerated by French authorities during Cold War for intelligence value.

Lives in exile—brilliant but embittered, haunted by past, with a sense of superiority.

Family & Decline:

Marries a fellow Soviet émigré, also carrying trauma.

Despite poverty and alienation, they have an unplanned child—Nathalie.

Becomes more religious in exile:

Uses faith to rationalize and justify his actions.

Becomes a controlling and abusive husband and father:

Traumatized, egotistical, and morally fractured.

Legacy marked by ideological extremism and deep personal damage.

Can't find proper work at first due to anti-USSR sentiments - first 2 decades in Lille marked by poverty

He works as a tutor

Slowly finds connections again as people recognize his prestige and skill

Works up in status again

His skills land him a spot on the council

Design Notes/Character Study:

Foil to Nathalie, the Duke, and Gabriel

Color scheme inverted from Gabriel’s

Nathalie dresses similarly to him

She looks more like her mother, but she undoubtedly is her father’s pet daughter

He dresses similarly to the Duke (in a darker color scheme)

Yellow tinge to his shirt - reminds viewer of decay and the past

Outfit based on Shostakovich

He likes to be put together:

Wears gloves

Doesn’t like to touch people directly

Touches Nathalie without gloves (views her as subhuman)

However, his past always cracks through

Clothes slightly oversized

Not afraid to get dirty

Clinical and precise

Juxtaposes Gabriel often getting emotional

Using Courier font rather than the usual Wild Words

Military training background in the USSR

Movements are precise and conservative

Gaunt

Muscle atrophy in the gulags

Doesn’t resort to brute force - is clinical and methodical in his violence

Uses leverage and environment to break bones

Learned to be observant

Scar on throat

His refusal to be silenced (contrasting Nathalie)

Dislikes humanity

Wants a better world

Likes cynical literature like Dostoevsky

Irony: completely misses the point of Crime and Punishment (book he is holding)

Blames the world around him

Believes Raskolnikov’s confession was weakness

Similar to Gabriel in that way

In the picture, he is beating up a predator

Irony: he too is a predator

Not out of concern or justice - out of possessiveness

Likes to inflict torture

First, break the legs (break strongest weapons; prevent escape)

Then, then the arms (not able to grab anything)

Final blow between C1-C7 vertebrae (if not dead, you’re quadriplegic for life)

Contrast to Nathalie, who prefers to tie up loose end quickly and cleanly + Gabriel who hasn’t crossed the line of killing