#popular advertising method

[brandonwheelz1]

Myths and Facts That You Should Know About Traditional Media Advertising!!!

Traditional media advertising has been a popular advertising method for years. It has proven to be an effective way to reach a wide audience and promote products and services. However, traditional media advertising has faced some criticism over the years. In this article, we'll take a closer look at some of the myths and facts about traditional media advertising to help you make an informed decision about your advertising strategy.

[leidensygdom]

Commission scams: A guide on how to avoid them and find legit artists

Hello! I am writing this guide in order to hopefully help people spot scammers and art thieves, to teach people how to deal with them and to give people ways to actually get real artists for commission work.

For those who do not know, there is a recurring, extremely widespread type of scam where someone will advertise their commissions using stolen artwork, or (sometimes) traced or AI-generated pictures. This started (as far as I know) on Twitter, but it is currently in all sorts of social media (I have found them in Twitter, Instagram, Bluesky and Tumblr) and also on Discord servers, often large Discord servers requiring no invites or that are easy to find through Discord advertisement places.

These do obviously hurt both, the people seeking to buy a commission (who will either get their money stolen, or given a product that is not of the quality that was advertised), and the artists whose work is being stolen, who are not getting the work themselves. It is important for people to learn how to identify these people, and to quickly take action when possible. This post is kind of lengthy, so please press the Keep reading button below for the full guide! (And please do share this post around if possible- This is a very common scam and I have met far too many people who have fallen to it or have got their art stolen due to it, including friends and myself.)

So, how do they work? (in Social media)

In my experience, a lot of these scammers either run multiple accounts or are part of a larger scheme, operating in organized groups that follow similar tactics. They will very often use automated means to advertise en masse. Those in social media will make accounts that post some example artwork, often with a myriad of tags, in styles that do not match (see first example, featuring my stolen art :'')). They very rarely post anything that isn't stolen artwork, or have any actual real following they interact with properly. They will then very often spam heavily through replies (such as it happens in Twitter), posting hundreds of really similar messages in a short period of time. In the second example, you can see an account from one of these scammers that is using automated posts to garner attention, which are shared by similar accounts (notice the same exact wording between the first and third post). The third example (in the Replies tab) shows how one of this accounts replies "Hi" to every single message they get.

They will often seek posts from people who are searching for commissions, answering them (often with a "I do commissions, DM me") or other variants of that. (They often only share their "art" on DMs to not be caught stealing by the original authors.) You can see an example of that on the first screenshot below. On Twitter, Instagram and pretty much any place where you can DM people, they may also come to your DMs, often starting with a "Hello" or something so you answer to them, and then they will suddenly share their commission information (as seen in the second picture).

In any case, they rarely have publicly available commission sheets, and will only disclose their prices on DMs. They may share more stolen artwork in there. From there on, they will often speak in fairly broken English, and try to lead you to commission them. They will haggle the prices if they can- But they tend to be fairly steep, with them going up to $300 a fullbody, which tends to be unusual in people without a fairly established following or popularity.

They will often give you a payment method that does not allow for refunds- Such as sending the money to "Friends and Family" in Paypal. This is actually illegal for commercial work, so if you get an artist telling you to pay them through such a method, please do be incredibly wary: Professionals will use methods that do have an option for refunds.

2. How do they work? (on Discord)

On Discord, they will often enter in servers where there may be a place for them to advertise, or servers available through Disboard and other Discord-community searchable sites. Then, they will often not interact at all with the community itself, but they will jump to advertising channels and post about "seeking for work". I have found out that scammers operating on Discord do only very rarely also have socials, so look out for that. Do reverse searches if you can. Legit artists don't tend to join Discords solely to advertise, so look up "from: [name]" on Discord and check how they have interacted in the server, if they have done that in any way. See the first and second example for an example on how they behave. First example has art from @ydteus (in the second message, the dragonborn's source is unknown.) Second example is from one of these accounts who entered on a Streamers' Discord. Streamers and VTubers are very popular targets for these scammers. Third example (with art from absent_lambeth on instagram, and unknown for the second picture) shows another important point, which I'll explain below.

Many of these scammers do not have solid commission sheets showing examples and prices for them. The third one even mentions "it is under construction", fully knowing a commission sheet is expected. Not every professional artist has them, but most do. It is often expected that people who do commissions will have some sort of Terms of Service at the very least, even if they do not have a commission sheet.

3. What do they do?

They scam you. You may never get any art from them. You may get traced art, or art that is not of the quality they advertised, because the art they used for promotion wasn't theirs on the first place. Or you may get an AI-generated picture, too. In either way: You will find yourself with +$200 less in your pocket and no way to seek a refund. So, it's very important you know how to spot them BEFORE they scam you. I have known people who have lost their money

4. How do I actually spot them?

Simply put, they do not act like normal artists would. Let's make a handy list of suspicious behaviours to look for, though.

Most people who draw commissions won't directly DM you unprompted to ask you to pay them for work. If you get such a DM- Report as spam and block.

Most of them don't act like bots, either. If you're on Twitter or similar pages, seek for extremely repetitive posts, hundreds of Replies in their Replies tab that are copypasted or very similar. If you see that, report as spam and block.

Reverse search is sadly very unreliable nowadays, but it does not hurt to try. A lot of them will modify the picture so it doesn't show in reverse search, but try it- And seek if it links to a different account with a different name.

As an ESL, I hate to say this, but the grand majority of them have really broken English, so look out for that. Not every person with broken English is a scammer, but it is something common amidst them. You will notice they fail to communicate general information. Try to ask them for Terms of Service, for example: They will probably be unable to provide you anything (if they do even understand you.)

You will rarely find them on your own unless you frequent specific tags, such as "commission" or "openforcommission". Or even using completely unrelated tags in their posts. I found one of them using a tag about someone's death to cop violence on their anime art. These people mostly only interact with their fellow scammers, but not with artists you'd find through other means.

As mentioned above, they won't provide you a payment method that allows for refunds the grand majority of the time. If someone tells you to send them money "as friends and family" in Paypal, or through something life Ko-fi's donations (although this one is rare), do not pay them. This is a general advice: Do not use payment methods that do not allow refunds for people you don't know.

Ask them for a commission sheet, a webpage, their Terms of Service and other things. Professionals should be able to provide at least one of these, usually.

5. What do I do if I find out they have stolen art/if my art has been stolen?

If you have found stolen art, let the original artist known ASAP if you can find them. Ask for help from friends if you cannot find them.

If you're the artist, DMCA claim. Every page has it, it is required for them to have it. If you search "dmca form (and the website's name)", it should show up. Bsky only has it in mail form right now, but it's there. A DMCA claim is a Copyright claim, and as long as you can show that you posted your picture somewhere before they did, you can do it. The form may seem scary, but it is not all that much. They will ask for your legal full name, address, a mail + a telephone, the url of the post stealing your art, an url to where you posted it first, and to sign/agree to some terms. DMCA claims tend to be processed swiftly (in about a day) because websites can get in trouble if they allow for copyrighted content to be stolen. And you actually do have rights to any picture you have created without needing to trademark it or anything.

You may also want to ask your friends to help you report the account and/or posts. Often, reporting it for spam will give you the best results. DMCA claims will take down the offending posts, but sadly, reports in most major places are rarely taken seriously, but they may limit an accounts' reach or auto-flag it as spam in DMs, so it is still a fairly effortless option to follow. DO still DMCA claim them though.

6. Where do I actually find real people to commission?

Your best bet is through other real people. Let me explain some good methods for this.

Do you have friends who are artists? Ask them if they have commissions open, or if they know other people who take them. Artists almost always know other artists, and they can quickly find you someone you can trust.

Did a friend of yours get a commission? Ask them who was it from if you like the style, and they may be able to get you a link to their social media!

Do you follow artists for any sort of content you're interested in? (General art, fanart/fandom stuff, people you look up to, etc). You can check their work first and see if they have commissions, or if they share art from other people, and then check those.

Scammers really don't partake in fandoms or have art-related posts go viral (some get some follower-begging bait going viral, but that's it). Chances are that, if you found a cool art in your dashboard or timeline, it is from a real artist.

I think places such as VGen need verification for artists and have ratings. I am not personally experienced with it, but you may want to check that out.

You can always ask people to double check with you if you found someone but are doubtful about them being legit. If you are part of any community, do ask there! If you have artist friends, tell them! A lot of artists are acquittanced with the scam issue.

I have seen people do lists of artists available for commissions in places such as bsky, too. These can be an option, but always do verify that the people doing the list in the first place do seem like an actual person.

Ending notes

This is a very long post, but I really wanted it to be very thorough. I would greatly appreciate if you could share it around, as it is a very widespread issue that not many know how to identify. If you do find out scammers in Discords, please DM the servers' admins and link them to this post so they can get banned, in order to prevent scamming and art theft.

If you have any question or you need someone to help you verify an artist being legit or a scammer, my DMs are open for that too. I have talked about this a bunch in other places and I am fairly experienced with these cases, and I would be very happy to be able to lend a hand and find you an artist, if you do need the help. Thank you for reading!

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

"Which is an uncomfortable notion because we’re used to a royalty that “has to be seen to be believed.”"

This is not an uncomfortable notion. It's been tested over centuries.

Every royal since the notion began has done the 'has to be seen to be believed' parades, and stats always come back that support is higher after the Monarch has made themselves visible especially to the ordinary public, but it works both ways because public investment gives the monarchy power against the establishment. 

I could give you over 50 examples where the Monarch's visibility increased allegiance to the Crown, but we'd be here all day, so i'll narrow it down to just 3 examples in 3 reigns. 

When Queen victoria was merely princess Alexandrine, heir to the throne, her mother ensured that the public would support her by taking her on tours of the country. This gave both her mother and the princess power at court and ensured a smooth transition to Queen when the time came. 

However, after Albert died and Victoria refused to be seen in public for 40yrs, the monarch suffered to the point of constitutional crisis and is the highest point of republican movement where the public called for the end of it as they didn't see why they should support an invisible institution. 

The funny thing is that Victoria was using the social media of her day - frequently releasing portraits and photos of her and her family, encouraging the govt to create endless monuments and dedications to her beloved Albert, and the govt encouraged industrialised to use the image of the Queen to advertise their goods throughout the Empire, but it didn't work to stem the tide of republicanism especially in an era that had so many social problems.

That's not to say that she wasn't working behind the scenes - she was, but her invisibility was a huge problem that nearly ended the monarchy.

Her son, as scandalous as he was, mingled with the public at large and when he became King, he reinstated the visibility to great success. Most, if not all, the public ceremonies that the royals do now are down to him. Everything from Trooping the colour to State opening of Parliament. Those ceremonies had been taking place in private already, but he added the royal family to them, and turned them into a public spectacle showcasing the monarchy. And he taught his children well on that point.

George 5 especially understood that lesson because he used it to cement public investment in the monarchy and that way fortify it against being toppled by the establishment or republicans. He did it by building on the public ceremonies of his father by making charity/ meet and greets with the public a feature of royal life. He also created the system of awarding ordinary citizens honours and making sure there is a public investiture which is still beloved to this day. 

George 6 and The Queen added their own versions of meet and greets eg The Queen added the walkabout which proved extremely popular. 

The issue for William more than KC3 might be of personality as William seems shy just like Kate which is why they are not entirely comfortable with the public showing of themselves, so they need to figure out a way to do it that allows them to maintain public investment in the royals. 

They might want to scale back or figure out different ways of being visible, but remote media doesn't work, and it would be foolish to throw away a method tested and proven over 1000yrs. 

Anecdotally, they might dislike local bread-and-butter, meet-and-great the public engagements because they don't understand the power of them, but let me tell you about The Queen visiting my village in 2012 as the first stop on her Jubilee tour on the country - we've grown little, but in reality, still a village. 

She didn't do much. She met some school children and many villagers, looked at some assembled stalls in the village square, patted afew dogs,  looked over our tiny Abbey and left. Entire thing probably lasted 2hrs or less. 

She never returned, but you'll be hard pressed to find a republican in the village following that visit. Growing up there, I would never have thought people enjoyed the royals except for Charles - our village is in the Duchy of Cornwall so we have more contact with Charles and everyone has opinions about him - good and bad, but The Queen's visit was a shot in the arm that people still talk about today. 

*****

Anon, you really missed the point I was making. You missed it so badly that you made it for me.

I didn’t say “royalty has to be seen to be believed” was uncomfortable. I said the idea of modern, scaled-back monarchy favoring quality over quantity where the royals may not be as often seen was uncomfortable.

Yes, physical access and “being seen” is a powerful tool in the monarchy but it’s no longer the *only* tool they have. What’s different about today than Queen Victoria’s time is the 24/7 news cycle, social media, the capability to do in-real-time virtual events, the ability to record both video and audio, television, internet, and phones. Today’s society is more connected than the Victorians may have ever thought possible. Royalty does not need to only be physically present to make an impact any more and that makes people uncomfortable because — as you proved — it upturns 120+ years of tradition. It’s a huge change, a paradigm shift.

Now, should royalty still be physically present and seen? Yes. How are William and Kate going to do that? No idea, but it’s probably going to be different than what everyone’s used to and there’s already grumbling about it because it’s a change from what they’re used to.

[reasonsforhope]

"Major technology companies signed a pact on Friday to voluntarily adopt "reasonable precautions" to prevent artificial intelligence (AI) tools from being used to disrupt democratic elections around the world.

Executives from Adobe, Amazon, Google, IBM, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, and TikTok gathered at the Munich Security Conference to announce a new framework for how they respond to AI-generated deepfakes that deliberately trick voters. 

Twelve other companies - including Elon Musk's X - are also signing on to the accord...

The accord is largely symbolic, but targets increasingly realistic AI-generated images, audio, and video "that deceptively fake or alter the appearance, voice, or actions of political candidates, election officials, and other key stakeholders in a democratic election, or that provide false information to voters about when, where, and how they can lawfully vote".

The companies aren't committing to ban or remove deepfakes. Instead, the accord outlines methods they will use to try to detect and label deceptive AI content when it is created or distributed on their platforms. 

It notes the companies will share best practices and provide "swift and proportionate responses" when that content starts to spread.

Lack of binding requirements

The vagueness of the commitments and lack of any binding requirements likely helped win over a diverse swath of companies, but disappointed advocates were looking for stronger assurances.

"The language isn't quite as strong as one might have expected," said Rachel Orey, senior associate director of the Elections Project at the Bipartisan Policy Center. 

"I think we should give credit where credit is due, and acknowledge that the companies do have a vested interest in their tools not being used to undermine free and fair elections. That said, it is voluntary, and we'll be keeping an eye on whether they follow through." ...

Several political leaders from Europe and the US also joined Friday’s announcement. European Commission Vice President Vera Jourova said while such an agreement can’t be comprehensive, "it contains very impactful and positive elements".  ...

[The Accord and Where We're At]

The accord calls on platforms to "pay attention to context and in particular to safeguarding educational, documentary, artistic, satirical, and political expression".

It said the companies will focus on transparency to users about their policies and work to educate the public about how they can avoid falling for AI fakes.

Most companies have previously said they’re putting safeguards on their own generative AI tools that can manipulate images and sound, while also working to identify and label AI-generated content so that social media users know if what they’re seeing is real. But most of those proposed solutions haven't yet rolled out and the companies have faced pressure to do more.

That pressure is heightened in the US, where Congress has yet to pass laws regulating AI in politics, leaving companies to largely govern themselves.

The Federal Communications Commission recently confirmed AI-generated audio clips in robocalls are against the law [in the US], but that doesn't cover audio deepfakes when they circulate on social media or in campaign advertisements.

Many social media companies already have policies in place to deter deceptive posts about electoral processes - AI-generated or not... 

[Signatories Include]

In addition to the companies that helped broker Friday's agreement, other signatories include chatbot developers Anthropic and Inflection AI; voice-clone startup ElevenLabs; chip designer Arm Holdings; security companies McAfee and TrendMicro; and Stability AI, known for making the image-generator Stable Diffusion.

Notably absent is another popular AI image-generator, Midjourney. The San Francisco-based startup didn't immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday.

The inclusion of X - not mentioned in an earlier announcement about the pending accord - was one of the surprises of Friday's agreement."

-via EuroNews, February 17, 2024

--

Note: No idea whether this will actually do much of anything (would love to hear from people with experience in this area on significant this is), but I'll definitely take it. Some of these companies may even mean it! (X/Twitter almost definitely doesn't, though).

Still, like I said, I'll take it. Any significant move toward tech companies self-regulating AI is a good sign, as far as I'm concerned, especially a large-scale and international effort. Even if it's a "mostly symbolic" accord, the scale and prominence of this accord is encouraging, and it sets a precedent for further regulation to build on.

[hello-nichya-here]

So I've asked you this in private, but I thought the rest of your followers should see this as your thoughts are quite entertaining.

What is your opinion on the idea of stuff like this being the only acceptable method of pornography?

*cracks knuckles* Let's get the easiest part out of the way first.

Saying Something Is "Female-Friendly" Is Just Marketing

I'm sorry (not really) to be the one to state the obvious, but at best labeling any kind of pornography as "female friendly" means "most of the people that enjoy this are women" - which is very different from saying "ALL women are into this" or "No guys are ever into this." It's the good old "this cartoon is for boys, that one is for girls."

It's not a radical statement, it's not revolutionary, and it is at best a morally neutral mention of a random statistic that is being used to find the best demography to advertise to and at worst just pointlessly trying to force people into boxes with that they are/are not allowed to enjoy based on their gender.

Don't believe me? Well, too bad because this image you're seeing is literally part of a facebook ad for a porn site. The name of the site and of the artist they were working with can be seen at the top in the uncut version. Like I said, it doesn't matter how "radical" these claims of "this product is made for/by X minority group" pretend to be, at the end of the day it's just marketing.

"Oh, but people obviously support the message it's sending anyway!" True... but that message is at best filled with poor word choices, and full on terrible at worst.

Consent - Important In Real Life, Meaningless In Fantasy

In the context of this being an ad for a porno site, I think it's safe to say "Consent-based" is just a way of assuring viewers that every actress was fully consenting to every sexual act and was not pressured into anything in any way, which is the bare minimum.

HOWEVER, I've seen plenty of people misunderstand or flat out lie about the "consent-based porn" term means. Like I explained, it is meant to be about the ACTORS consenting - but their "characters" don't need to consent to anything because they are not real. A hardcore CNC fantasy with the actress pretending she doesn't want the sex/is not enjoying it while her co-star pretends to force themselves on her is STILL consent-based if the actress playing the victim role can stop the scene for literally any reason and even walk out completely if that's what she wants.

Unfortunatelly, because kink-shaming is still very much a thing, people act like that is crossing a line and totally counts as legitimate assault - even in videos that the actors before AND after the scene mention how excited they are, how great it was, openly discuss their kinks, etc.

Nobody needs to watch something so extreme if they don't want to, but I have a serious problem with people saying stuff like that shouldn't ever happen. If the people involved in the role-play are doing it WILLINGLY and can back down at any moment, then it isn't in anyway immoral.

Sexual Attraction Is NOT The Same As Respect/Acceptance

Once again, I'm sorry (not really) to be the one who has to tell you guys this, but "representation" in porn is meaningless because:

1 - It doesn't matter how many porn videos there are of any minority group - each individual person picking something to watch will only click on the ones that show people with the body-types and genders they are attracted to, doing stuff they personally find appealing.

2 - "This kind of porn is popular" does not in anyway translate to "this is what society deems morally acceptable". A ton of homophobes LOVE lesbian porn. My country, Brazil, has always had porn with trans people and crossdressers as one of THE most popular trends - yet we are also the country that commits hate crimes against them the most, even when compared to places where being trans or crossdressing is literally a crime that earns you an authomatic death sentence. Incest porn has been obscenely popular everywhere for decades yet most people STILL find the thought of real-life incest absoutely repulsive.

3 - "I am not usually/ever attracted to people of group X" doesn't authomatically mean "I HATE people of group X." Just cause I like red-heads and brunettes, doesn't mean I'll be commiting hate crimes against blondes. If that was how things worked, sex-repulsed asexuals would hate literally all of humanity.

Wanting porn to be inclusive is utterly pointless because sexual attraction is 100% morally neutral. Which brings us to...

What Even Counts As "Objectification"?

Once again, if by "Don't objectify people" we are talking about how "Just because you hired this person to star in a porno, it doesn't mean you can just ignore their consent, comfort and safety for the sake of your fetish" then yeah, that's the bare minimum.

However, if you're saying "don't objectify people" as a way to say "Don't make the video too graphic/obscene/kinky" then we absolutely have a problem here because, my guy, it's porn. It is all about letting us see hot people looking slutty and fucking in great, explict detail.

"Oh, but these sexual acts are humiliating and gross!" To you, maybe. But not to the actors that are very willing to do it. I've had some of my fetishes be called both deeply disturbing and gross AND the most vanilla shit ever. That kind of stuff is 100% subjective, and the only people who can say "I felt disrespected/unsafe/abused" are the actors themselves. Once again, if THEY consented, there's nothing wrong with it regardless of it appealing to you or not.

"Oh, but we'd be wasting an opportunity to educate people/give X group more representation"

If I ever click on a porno and there's a two minute intro with the actors, both belonging to some minority group, talking about how one of them is also historian and the other is a astronomer, I will STILL only care about seeing them fuck even though I love both history and astronomy - not because I don't think they can't possibly know what they're talking about since they are sex workers or because of some kind of bigotry, but because, surprise surprise, I only check out porn sites for the porn. That's what EVERYONE does.

Hell, bad porn can be used to educate people. 50 Shades is awful and a ton of ignorant people think it is 100% accurate to how BDSM actually works. However, this has led to entire groups of people who are actually kinky to discuss REAL BDSM with vanilla people and educate them on how it can be a great thing. And, of course, there's people that enjoy those shitty novels/movies but KNOW they are not accurate representiation of BDSM because they are aware that PORN IS JUST FANTASY, NOT A GUIDE TO HOW SEX SHOULD WORK!

"But it's so shallow to focus only on these people's looks and know literally nothing else about them!"

Yes, and? Being "shallow" isn't always bad, and feeling attracted to someone solely for their looks is not a crime.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a goddamn fanfic writer and I was once the classic "teenager that totally thinks she'd have a chance with that famous rockstar that is old enough to be her dad", I KNOW that the thought of a real connection (emotional, intelectual, etc) CAN be hot - but there's nothing wrong with "These two people whose names I don't even know look hot, I wanna see them fuck, then I'll go take a nap and never think of them again." These porn stars are not crying themselves to sleep because people whose faces they've never even seen don't know anything about them other than how they look without clothes on.

"Female" Pleasure - Yet ANOTHER Hollow Marketing Term!

Seriously, that last one REALLY irritated me because it's one of those things that tries to sound progressive, but are meaningless at best and downright sexist at worst, because it implies:

1 - There must be a strict separation between "female" pleasure and "male" pleasure. A sexual act cannot possibly be enjoyable for both the guy and the girl, and gender prevents men and women from EVER being into the same thing (as a woman that finds more porn that fits my taste in "male-centered" sites than in most "porn for women" sites, this one gets on my nerves).

2 - Pleasuring one's partner cannot possibly be enjoyable - so, say, a girl cannot possibly enjoying giving her boyfriend head, and vice versa.

3 - Sex is a competition and women NEED to win because "female" pleasure is apparently more moral than "male" pleasure (hence the "ALL porn can and should be 'female' friendly")

4 - ALL women are turned on/turned off by the exact same sexual acts, and the level of pleasure they get is always exactly the same. Preferences are not individual and never change over time. (Seriously, a woman directs a sex scene between two actresses, the editor is a woman, and all the viewers are women - which one will speak for her entire gender and decide what "female" pleasure looks like? You see how silly this sounds?)

Conclusion

Sex and sexuality can never be over-simplified like that, and fantasies are just harmless fun.

[resplendentoutfit]

Deathly Pale

The desire of women for ultra-pale skin didn't end with the Elizabethan era. In Victorian times, women still coveted the look of translucent white skin and applied the same causic, poisonous substances to their face, neck, arms and hands. Turbuculosis was a common cause of death in the era. The look of death was considered romantic for its tragic and poetic beauty. Even if a Victorian woman wasn't charmed by death due to turbuculosis, she still coveted pale, translucent skin. Tanned faces were the result of long hours of work out-of- doors, belonging to the lower classes.

“The death of a beautiful woman is, unquestionably, the most poetical topic in the world.” - Edgar Allan Poe

The two predominant beauty standards were the painted beauty and the natural beauty. The later was the preferred ideal of the average fashionable woman. The methods she employed to achieve good skin and complexion were all in an effort to look natural. The overly painted look was seen as racy - the province of prostitutes and "loose" women.

Upon a well-off Victorian woman's dressing table were arsenic, ammonia, and opium, among other toxic substances. The Ugly-girl Papers, Or, Hints for the Toilet was a book published in 1874 that contained a series of beauty articles for Harper's Bazaar. The author recommends coating the face with opium before bed and a brisk wash with ammonia in the morning. How refreshing.

Lotions containing lead were popular for whitening the skin as well as erasing freckles and other blemishes. Complexion wafers containing arsenic were widely advertised. These products were peddled to women as being harmless when, in fact, they caused headaches, nausea, and even paralysis.

To achieve eyes with a seductive gaze, Victorian women used Belladonna or Deadly Nightshade in the form of eye drops, which diluted the pupils. Eye irritation and even blindness were reported symptoms of this practice.

A little color over that deathly white facial palor was usually achieved with beet juice and sometimes, animal blood. It's intriguing to wonder how women came into possession of animal blood, though the answer may be as simple as a purchase from a local vendor. Vermillion, also known as red mercury, was used to tint the lips and was known to be poisonous.

Virginie Gautreau, the subject of the famous John Singer Sargent painting known as Madama X, was not only known to use products to whiten her skin, but was also purported to use indigo dye to paint veins over the ultra-pale veneer of her skin. I haven't found any sound evidence of this, however. What I did read in both The Collector and in an article at minsooki, was that over her arsenic pale skin, Virginie used a lavender powder to counteract the warmth of candlelight.

What's most troubling is that in the face of ample evidence of the health consequences of many of these products, women continued to value the look they provided, over their own health and safety.

References:

• Molly Brown House Museum: Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder: How Victorians Used Common Poisons to Become Drop Dead Gorgeous

• Awful Forever

• Atlas Obscura

• minsooki.com

• The Collector

[maryrouille]

∼ Late August ∼ Study update

I thought the next update would be in September, but I woke up today and I saw in my email box a positive review of my first scientific paper to be published, hurray! It is also pleasing to think that it was written by a professor who is an authority in the field of popular culture and visual arts.

I’ll leave a fragment here so I can come back to it more often 🧡

One of the more interesting research achievements [!] proposed in the forthcoming publication is "Changing stereotypes as a method of creatively using the image of a woman in advertising" by [my name]. Thanks to the rich and interesting literature on the subject, the Author competently [!] presents the issue of creativity in advertising, achieved through the transformation of stereotypes.

The second joyful achievement is that I have completed the design of a large research study. All that remains is to submit it at the end of September and wait for the approval review.

Fingers crossed and at this stage it seems like it makes sense to open the champagne, right?

[what-even-is-thiss]

Someday when I have a more consistent schedule I really do wanna have a YouTube channel. And I’ve wondered about sponsorships. I’ve gotten offers on this very blog before to participate in one of those stupid ads for drop shipping crystals that project your birth sign or whatever that I’ve turned down.

I’ve wondered though. Because on one hand sponsors pay good money and money is a thing that is required to live in this day and age. But also I feel like if I ever took a sponsor nobody could ever fully and completely trust my opinion on anything again.

There’s this YouTuber I love whose channel is called Swell Entertainment. And she comes across as being very honest but also she takes sponsorships. And a big part of her channel is review content. So sometimes I wonder if she’s pulling her punches slightly because she still wants to be marketable. But I don’t hold that against her because she’s living in LA for god’s sake and sponsorships provide much more reliable income than other methods.

It’s kinda sad that advertisement is almost required to make a living creating internet content.

I pay for YouTube premium not just because I wanted to get rid of ads on my smart tv, but because creators get more money per view from YouTube premium subscribers. I can’t afford to subscribe to a dozen patreons but I can afford one cheap subscription.

I hope if I ever have a channel big enough to have sponsorships I either take them extremely rarely for stuff I actually care about or don’t take them at all. Because I want to be able to just have opinions about stuff openly. But the sad truth is that money can be an issue. So. Who knows? I certainly don’t hold it against people who take sponsorships. That’s just how the industry works nowadays. They need money to live. And if you have adhd which many creative types do contractual deadlines can really help you get stuff done. And sponsors can get you experiences like vacations and luxury hotel stays and free reviewer copies of books and video games. Who can blame them? There’s so much stuff available to you from sponsors that can improve your quality of life and help you make your business better. Money to hire editors and voice actors and writers and animators, buy better equipment, rent out a sound stage.

But. Idk. A lot of those sponsored products aren’t that good. And a lot of people are susceptible to advertising. It works on a lot of people. Especially when it comes from a face they trust.

The tradeoff to take sponsors or not is a difficult one. Honestly and truly. And it’s very probable that I’ll never be popular enough to actually have to make a decision on these things. But I still think about it every time I see a sponsored segment. What levels of calculation have gone into that? None? A lot? I’ll never be allowed to know because that would be bad for business.

[beardedmrbean]

Submitted by @thejdog2000

WASHINGTON (AP) — A judge on Monday ruled that Google’s ubiquitous search engine has been illegally exploiting its dominance to squash competition and stifle innovation, a seismic decision that could shake up the internet and hobble one of the world’s best-known companies.

The highly anticipated decision issued by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta comes nearly a year after the start of a trial pitting the U.S. Justice Department against Google in the country’s biggest antitrust showdown in a quarter century.

After reviewing reams of evidence that included testimony from top executives at Google, Microsoft and Apple during last year’s 10-week trial, Mehta issued his potentially market-shifting decision three months after the two sides presented their closing arguments in early May.

“After having carefully considered and weighed the witness testimony and evidence, the court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Mehta wrote in his 277-page ruling. He said Google’s dominance in the search market is evidence of its monopoly.

Google “enjoys an 89.2% share of the market for general search services, which increases to 94.9% on mobile devices,” the ruling said.

It represents a major setback for Google and its parent, Alphabet Inc., which had steadfastly argued that its popularity stemmed from consumers’ overwhelming desire to use a search engine so good at what it does that it has become synonymous with looking things up online. Google’s search engine processes an estimated 8.5 billion queries per day worldwide, nearly doubling its daily volume from 12 years ago, according to a recent study released by the investment firm BOND.

Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs, said the company intends to appeal Mehta’s findings.

“This decision recognizes that Google offers the best search engine, but concludes that we shouldn’t be allowed to make it easily available,” Walker said.

For now, the decision vindicates antitrust regulators at the Justice Department, which filed its lawsuit nearly four years ago while Donald Trump was still president, and has been escalating it efforts to rein in Big Tech’s power during President Joe Biden’s administration.

“This victory against Google is an historic win for the American people,” said Attorney General Merrick Garland. “No company — no matter how large or influential — is above the law. The Justice Department will continue to vigorously enforce our antitrust laws.”

The case depicted Google as a technological bully that methodically has thwarted competition to protect a search engine that has become the centerpiece of a digital advertising machine that generated nearly $240 billion in revenue last year. Justice Department lawyers argued that Google’s monopoly enabled it to charge advertisers artificially high prices while also enjoying the luxury of not having to invest more time and money into improving the quality of its search engine — a lax approach that hurt consumers.

Mehta’s ruling focused on the billions of dollars Google spends every year to install its search engine as the default option on new cellphones and tech gadgets. In 2021 alone, Google spent more than $26 billion to lock in those default agreements, Mehta said in his ruling.

Google ridiculed those allegations, noting that consumers have historically changed search engines when they become disillusioned with the results they were getting. For instance, Yahoo was the most popular search engine during the 1990s before Google came along.

Mehta said the evidence at trial showed the importance of the default settings. He noted that Microsoft’s Bing search engine has 80% share of the search market on the Microsoft Edge browser. The judge said that shows other search engines can be successful if Google is not locked in as the predetermined default option.

Still, Mehta credited the quality of Google’s product as an important part of its dominance, as well, saying flatly that “Google is widely recognized as the best (general search engine) available in the United States.” _____________

Google “enjoys an 89.2% share of the market for general search services, which increases to 94.9% on mobile devices,” the ruling said.

Anyone that's old enough to remember the Microsoft antitrust lawsuit should remember it was in part because IE was included with windows and that was a no no for allowing competition.

Alphabet Inc may well be getting a taste of this now with google's dominance and all the chromium nonsense.

Fingers crossed, Fed's RICO/AntiTrust division has been busy lately

The Consumer Choice Center, a lobbying group that has fought other attempts to rein in businesses, decried Mehta’s decision as a step in the wrong direction. “The United States is drifting toward the anti-tech posture of the European Union, a part of the world that makes almost nothing and penalizes successful American companies for their popularity,” said Yael Ossowski, the center’s deputy director.

Mehta’s conclusion that Google has been running an illegal monopoly sets up another legal phase to determine what sorts of changes or penalties should be imposed to reverse the damage done and restore a more competitive landscape. He scheduled a Sept. 6 hearing to begin setting the stage for the next phase.

The potential outcome could result in a wide-ranging order requiring Google to dismantle some of the pillars of its internet empire, or preventing it from paying to ensure its search engine automatically answers queries on the iPhone and other devices. Or, the judge could conclude only modest changes are required to level the playing field.

“Google’s loss in its search antitrust trial could be a huge deal — depending on the remedy,” said Emarketer senior analyst Evelyn Mitchell-Wolf.

Regardless, she added, a drawn-out appeals process will delay any immediate effects for both consumers and advertisers.

The appeals process could take as long as five years, predicted George Hay, a law professor at Cornell University who was the chief economist for the Justice Department’s antitrust division for most of the 1970s. That lengthy process will enable Google to fend off the likelihood of Mehta banning default search agreements, Hay said, but it probably won’t shield the company from class-action lawsuits citing the judge’s findings that advertisers were gouged with monopolistic pricing.

If there is a significant shakeup, it could turn out to be a coup for Microsoft, whose own power was undermined during the late 1990s when the Justice Department targeted the software maker in an antitrust lawsuit accusing it of abusing the dominance of its Windows operating system on personal computers to lock out competition.

That Microsoft case mirrored the one brought against Google in several ways and now the result could also echo similarly. Just as Microsoft’s bruising antitrust battle created distractions and obstacles that opened up more opportunities for Google after its 1998 inception, the decision against Google could be a boon for Microsoft, which already has a market value of more than $3 trillion. At one time, Alphabet was worth more than Microsoft, but now trails its rival, with a market value of about $2 trillion.

If Mehta decides to limit or ban Google’s default search deals, it could squeeze Apple’s profits, too. Although parts of his decision were redacted to protect confidential business information, Mehta noted that Google paid Apple an estimated $20 billion in 2022, doubling from 2020. The judge also noted Apple has periodically considered building its own search technology, but backed off that after a 2018 analysis estimated the company would lose more than $12 billion in revenue during the first five years after a break-up with Google.

Google’s payments have helped Apple’s steadily growing services division, which generated $85 billion in revenue during the company’s last fiscal year. Apple didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Justice Department’s antitrust division has recently taken on some of the biggest companies in the world. It sued Apple in March and in May announced a sweeping lawsuit against Ticketmaster and its owner, Live Nation Entertainment. Antitrust enforcers have also opened investigations into the roles Microsoft, Nvidia and OpenAI have played in the artificial intelligence boom.

The Biden administration has won some big cases, including blocking mergers of some of the world’s biggest publishers as well as JetBlue Airways and Spirit Airlines. It’s also had some notable setbacks, including in the sugar and healthcare industries.

Google faces several other legal threats both in the U.S. and abroad. In September, a federal trial is scheduled to begin in Virginia over the Justice Department’s allegations that Google’s advertising technology constitutes an illegal monopoly.

[yarrayora]

post-canon where magic is revealed and vampires try to integrate into human society while the aliceins, hugh, tsubaki, and perhaps even gear probably have enough funds to help the subclasses when necessary, it doesn't solve one fundamental problem that even money will have trouble buying: a stockpile of blood

buying and selling blood is usually limited for healthcare organizations and scientific reasons, and although feeding vampires would count as healthcare you can just hear people saying we should prioritize the living but only because there's a new subspecies to oppress. lmao.

anyway i tried googling whether it's legal or not for an individual to give/sell blood to another individual and as expected i can't find shit so i'm making stuff up now

after all manga is a world where you can pay for vampire host's services with blood

and that's exactly what they're gonna do in japan: opening a host club where you can pay with blood. with that said it means they won't push for their guests to buy alcohol for the sake of sales because their goal isn't for monetary profit but for sustainable food source.

not to mention an alcoholic blood cant be good for a vampire's health lol

outside of japan i think some vampires will organize to target health nuts by opening gyms where they advertise their trainer as "a war general who survived thousands of wars" unfortunately it attracts white supremacists so they have to change the tagline BUT ANYWAY they claim that they will check how healthy the human is by tasting their blood. jury's out on how reliable that method is but it makes the gym popular.

some subclasses accept interviews from historians in exchange of blood donation and some teach long forgotten crafts to modern day craftsmen and so on and so forth

money can't buy everything, but humans' needs to connect with each other will make up for it

[empirearchives]

Citizen Cooks in the Age of Napoleon

Excerpt about the role of cooks in France after the abolition of culinary guilds, and how they navigated a world which demanded for them to find new ways to stay relevant and prosperous. From Defining Culinary Authority: The Transformation of Cooking in France, 1650-1830 by Jennifer J. Davis:

French cooks sought new sites upon which to rebuild the authority of culinary labor. Throughout the early nineteenth century cooks increasingly adopted scientific terms to demonstrate their reliability and profound knowledge of the culinary arts. Such language communicated the author's education and distinction, just as an appeal to an elite patron had done in the 1660s and referral to a cook's professional expertise had done in the 1760s. The rhetoric and institutions of scientific knowledge also provided a means of distinguishing men's work from women's in the post-revolutionary era. During the early nineteenth century, cooks' claims to scientifically valuable savoir-faire rested on three crucial points of culinary innovation: food preservation, the improved production of bouillon, and gelatin extraction.

As these processes left the realm of traditional knowledge and became sites of scientific inquiry by tradespeople and amateurs alike, cooks sought to maintain authority in this arena by including scientific terms and theories in cookbooks, advertisements, and government petitions.

Two factors encouraged cooks' claims to scientific knowledge during this era. First, when Napoleon Bonaparte took the reins of government as first consul in 1799 and established himself as emperor in 1804, he raised medical doctors and academic scientists, Idéologues, to positions of political prominence. From these posts, the Idéologues subsidized experiments and inventions deemed useful to the nation and encouraged the popularization of science in the public sphere through state sponsorship of exhibitions and print forums. The Idéologues particularly supported research related to food preparation and preservation that might benefit France's armies and navies, with obvious benefits for professional cooks. Many cooks presented their particular techniques to the government during this time, seeking both financial recompense and public acclaim. Second, a voluntary association closely allied with the Idéologues' vision, the Société d'encouragement pour l'industrie nationale (Society for the Encouragement of National Industry), provided a forum in which formally trained scientists, politicians, merchants, artisans, and curious educated men might unite to address questions that inhibited French science and industry.

Together, these men sought to develop a more coherent program for industrial advancement than any one group could achieve independently. The society explicitly sought to join scientific knowledge to artisanal practical expertise, recognizing that each group had strengths that would benefit industrial development. This association invested heavily in three diffuse projects that eventually infused the most basic culinary processes with scientific awareness: new methods of food preservation to benefit the nation's armies and navies, new methods of stock preparation to sustain the nation's poor, and new methods of extracting gelatin from bones to improve hospital and military diets at little added expense.

[goetiae]

The Ouija board is a spiritual and magical tool from the 1890s with a long and complicated history. It has long since been treated as one of the most popular and most commercialized methods of communication with the dead, though this is not the only means of its usage: throughout its time of existence, the Ouija board has been used to solve mysteries and justify committing crimes.

The first commercial advertisements for the Ouija board appeared in the beginning of the 1890s: in 1891, a Pittsburgh toy and novelty shop published an advertisement about the board. The publication stated that the Ouija board answered questions "about the past, present and future with marvelous accuracy", could be used by those of any social class, and provided connection "between the known and unknown, the material and immaterial."

However, the Ouija board goes back to an earlier time period. It can be traced back to the Spiritualist movement that reached America in the middle of the 19th century, following a trend set by Europeans a long while prior. In 1848, the Fox sisters made an appearance, claiming that they received messages from the dead. As the board did not exist yet, the spirits still used a technique called rapping - they would allegedly tap on the walls to answer questions of the mediums.

Spiritualism in America quickly grew, aided by numerous spiritualists coming forth to the national press to share their experiences; the second half of the 19th century became the peak of it. Its popularity was not affected by the prominent religiousness of the population. One could be a spiritualist and a Christian at the same time. It was also rather selective in its adepts as claims were often spread about particular temperaments being more suited for spiritualist seances; alongside specific atmospheric, mental, and physical conditions. There was much basis for criticism and much unknown. The movement offered solace to those who lost the loved ones due to disease or wars of the difficult century. It reached as high as the White House with Mary Todd Lincoln practicing seances to contact her son.

With the growth of the spiritualist movement came the need for better, faster methods of communication; rapping was becoming obsolete. The Kennard Novelty Company from Chestertown, Maryland, was the first to respond to the popular demand and set up a manufactured production of the Ouija board in 1886.

Initially recorded in Ohio by the Associated Press, the talking board quickly fell into Charles Kennard's focus of attention. He and other investors set up a company in 1890 to produce and market the new talking boards. None of them were spiritualists, merely keen businessmen.

The name "Ouija" was not invented yet at the time. Despite common misconception, it is not a combination of the French and German words for yes. Robert Murch, a Ouija historian, considers Helen Bond, sister of one of the company's investors Elijah Bond, to be the source of the name. It is claimed that "Ouija" was a name given by the board during one of the seances when asked what they should call it. It is alleged that in order to receive a patent for the production of the talking board, Bond had to demonstrate its abilities. A patent officer requested that his name is to be spelled, accurately, with the help of the board; when that was granted, Bond and Co were permitted a patent to their "toy or game" - it happened in the year 1891.

In 1892, the company was renamed into the Ouija Novelty Company with its former employee William Fuld in control. Him and his brother Isaac initially worked together, but in 1901 Isaac Fuld & Brother's agreement was void and William received exclusive rights to produce the Ouija. Legal feuds led to the two brothers bringing the issue to court where William Fuld Manufacturing Company received an injunction against Isaac, prohibiting him from manufacturing the boards. Interestingly, and eerily enough, he never claimed to have ties with the invention of the board - and died from a fall off the roof of the very same company the board "told him" to build (1919 Baltimore Sun).

The Ouija board was met with enthusiasm by the general public. The murder of Joseph Burton Elwell, a well-known NYC gambler, attracted spiritualists in 1920s who attempted to solve it with the help of the board. In 1921, a Chicago woman was attributed to a psychiatric hospital: she was claiming that "the spirits" told her to leave her deceased mother's body in the living room for two weeks before burying her in the backyard. In 1930, two women in Buffalo, New York, murdered another woman, supposedly encouraged by the talking board. In 1958, a will of a deceased Mrs. Helen Dow Peck made the news as she left an insane $152,000 to a bodiless spirit she encountered through the Ouija.

One of the most popular cases regarding the use of the Ouija board refers to a housewife named Mrs. Curran, from St. Louis, who claimed to be speaking with a spirit of a 17th century lady called Patience Worth that passed down messages to her. It was published about in the New York Tribune in 1919. The case was taken in with much critical acclaim, the psychologists working with Mrs. Curran claiming that the spirit must have never been a real person; but the apparent difference in its intelligence as compared to Mrs. Curran must denote a degree of "subconscious" thinking.

Objects of similar properties to the Ouija board have been present in different cultures since long ago. In China, for example, there were fuji (扶乩/扶箕) boards for planchette writing that are most commonly cited to be one of the inspirations for the modern day talking boards.

After the invention of the talking board, many others followed. in 1900, George Foster Pearson invented the Cablegraph, a horseshoe magnet for spirit communication - but it was made out of wood and the creator still claimed it to attract spiritual activity. This board and earlier homemade inventions of a similar kind were titled dial boards and were practically rotating discs manipulated by the medium or the spirit.

The mysterious Spirit Planchette rose to popularity fast and steadily: it was spoken of in the press and in multitudes of books released in the 20th century. One of such books, Looking Into The Future by Will Goldston (1906), speaks of "the planchette" with much enthusiasm. It is interestingly marked that it isn't for everyone that the Planchette would write or even move - a convenient notion indeed.

The Cablegraph, or Wander Board, was said to be used at, ideally, evening hours with the person sitting down in front of it and using their fingers, which are to be "magnetized" through the help of another or without it. Then, using one's judgement of the spirit's intention, they are to rotate the disc. The concept relied on the idea of "magnetism" inherent to some humans - and, of course, possessed different degrees of reliability.

Another invention to resemble the Ouija board came forth at around the same time: created by Hudson Tuttle, it was a circle on a cardboard base with a dial attached to it so it would rotate to spell out messages. The invention was meant to be a cheap alternative for those who could not affort a proper spiritual tool from one of the bigger manufacturers. The tool was called the Psychograph by the creator himself, though, unfortunately, not many survived to our day.

Prior to the invention of the Psychograph and other similar boards, a table was a common tool used for spirit communication. Participants of seances were seated around the table, which, once the spirit was called upon, tilted in order to rap the leg against the floor. The number of taps means yes, no, or doubtful. An alphabet held up over the board could be used for more complicated questions. In 1853, a Spiritual Telegraph was invented: a round dial with a needle to point between letters.

Robert Hare, a chemistry professor, initially wished to expose table-tipping seances as a fraud but fell a believer into spiritualism himself. In 1885, he released a book Experimental Investigation of the Spirit Manifestations in which he detailed on the methods he used to prevent mediums from tricking participants of seances. Those included obstructing the mediums' line of sight, adding weights to the spiritual tools, and more. After those tests, Hare invented a Spiritoscope and presented it as a new tool to contact the spirits of the dead. Due to his obvious acceptance of the spiritualist movement, he was refused by the academia but readily welcomed into the spiritual circles: his tools flourished.

In Europe, similar devices to Hare's Spiritoscope were created in 1860s. Allan Kardec, the father of French Spiritism, invented Pytho or the Thought Reader - a variation of a dial pointer board. Little is known about the history behind similar objects in England but early patents for "spirit boards" survive. The popularity of a dial planchette never rose up to that of the Ouija board, but there are some similar devices scattered across the ages: Leonardi Studios' 1966 Phantom Wheel, Milton Bradley's 1895 Genii, Telepathic Spirit Communicator from Britain, and more.

[southeastasianists]

There was a time when Prabowo Subianto's name would have spooked most Indonesians.

But now young voters appear to be charmed by the defence minister's slick makeover. The fiery ex-special forces commander dogged by allegations of human rights abuses and disappearances has become a cute grandfather made for memes.

"He is much older, but he is able to embrace my generation," says a 25-year-old supporter of his, Albert Joshua.

Now 72, Mr Prabowo is running to succeed the popular Joko Widodo when the world's third-largest democracy votes on 14 February. He is promising more of the stability and economic development Mr Widodo, or Jokowi as he is better known, pushed during his decade in power.

So far the polls put Mr Prabowo ahead of his younger rivals, Ganjar Pranowo and Anies Baswedan. Both men are in their 50s and have experience running key Indonesian provinces as governors. Job security, infrastructure and a bigger diplomatic role for Indonesia dominate their campaigns.

Mr Prabowo's running mate is Mr Widodo's eldest son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka. It's a choice that many see as a tacit blessing by the president, who is yet to endorse anyone, including his own party's candidate, Mr Pranowo.

But a Prabowo presidency is also alarming to many, who say he has never been held accountable for the alleged abduction and killing of pro-democracy student activists decades ago.

A young voter, who did not wish to be named, says she is "terrified" he will win: "If he could be an accomplice of silencing voices then he will be silencing those voices now if he gets elected."

"Cuteness" hardly makes an eligible leader, she says. "If that's how you think a leader should be, then you should elect kittens."

Indonesia's cat-loving 'gemoy squad'

Cats are also a part of Mr Prabowo's social media campaign. His brown and white stray, Bobby, has his own well-curated Instagram account that describes him as a "patriot".

Then there are the TikTok videos of Mr Prabowo doing his signature move - an awkward shuffle across the stage - or shooting hearts at the audience. The gushing response has dubbed him "gemoy", a moniker for all things cuddly and adorable. His young supporters call themselves the "gemoy squad".

Social media has been the cornerstone of his outreach. Millennials and Gen Z make up more than half of Indonesia's 205 million eligible voters - they also account for many of the 167 million Indonesians who use social media.

Mr Prabowo's official Facebook and affiliated accounts spent $144,000 in advertising over the past three months, according to Meta's data. That's almost double Mr Pranowo's spend, and triple that of Mr Baswedan.

"I rarely see Prabowo's real picture anymore," said Yoes C Kenawas, a research fellow at Atma Jaya University.

Instead the internet, drawing rooms and streets are filled with posters of Mr Prabowo as a chubby cartoon character. This new "avatar... is all over Indonesia", Mr Kenawas says. "That's how they're softening his image. And so far, it's pretty successful."

A spokesperson for Mr Prabowo's campaign said they were just trying to attract young people through a "fun" campaign: "Politics can be conveyed through different methods... that's not a bad thing," Dedek Prayudi told the BBC.

Gen Z voter Rahayu Sartika Dewi says she is drawn to Mr Prabowo's plans to develop the renewable energy and farming sectors. She calls the campaign "very cute, fun and approachable... not too heavy like in previous years".

Mr Prabowo ran for president, and lost, in 2014 and 2019. But this campaign has been remarkably different.

"The logic is that Prabowo's losses were, at least in part, because his strongman image and firebrand style alienated parts of the electorate," says Dr Eve Warburton, director of the Australia National University's Indonesia Institute.

Mr Prabowo is also targeting a generation that has no memory of the time when he rose to the peak of his power. That happened during the dictatorship of General Suharto, who was forced from office in 1998. His 32-year reign, which many Indonesians credit with modernising the country, was also a time of brutal repression and bloodshed.

Twenty-five years on, young voters say they would rather judge Mr Prabowo on how he tackles unemployment and cost of living. He has promised to create 19 million new jobs over the next five years.

"I know activists are still speaking out... but we have to move on," Mr Joshua says.

Mr Prabowo's campaign has denied the allegations, although he was dismissed from the military for his alleged role in the activists' disappearance. In 2014 he told Al Jazeera that he had ordered their kidnapping but had only done so on the orders of superiors.

In recent months videos have been showing up of people in tears, expressing their sympathy for him, claiming he had been "victimised by his opponents". They often feature young people, and some election watchers doubt if these are genuine supporters.

Ms Dewi says his presidential nomination is "proof" that he has shaken off the allegations.

An extraordinary comeback

Mr Prabowo was born into a wealthy political family, the son of a renowned economist who served in the Indonesian cabinet.

He followed his father who left the country in 1957 under a cloud of controversy, and spent a decade of his childhood in exile in Europe.

After returning home, he joined the army and quickly moved up the ranks to become the captain of Indonesia's elite special forces, the Kopassus.

By then he had already been accused of human rights violations in restive East Timor, where he had served as a member of the unit. His exact role in the military operations in East Timor that claimed hundreds of lives has never been proven and he denies the allegations. But the murky blot on his career has stayed.

He married one of Suharto's daughters and remained in the dictator's inner circle. As Suharto's reign crumbled in the late 1990s, the Kopassus was accused of kidnapping more than 20 student activists who opposed the regime. At least a dozen of them are still missing and feared dead. Those who survived have alleged torture.

Mr Prabowo was discharged from the military, went into self-imposed exile in Jordan, made it onto a blacklist in Australia and was banned from travelling to the United States.

But he made a comeback in 2019, when Mr Widodo appointed him as his defence minister, turning the rivals into allies. The surprise move followed a bitter election win - Mr Prabowo blamed his loss on cheating - and violent protests that left eight people dead.

"How can we expect justice if the perpetrator becomes the president?" asks Suciwati, the widow of a prominent human rights lawyer. Munir Said Thalib spent much of his life investigating the 1998 disappearances. He was assassinated in 2004 on a flight. The pilot was found guilty, but Suciwati does not believe that is the full story.

Prabowo's presidency "would be an extraordinary defeat for us, the families of victims, and human rights activists", she says.

Mr Widodo's support has helped restore Mr Prabowo's image, some say. Social media is "not enough", Mr Kenawas adds, and "how the state machineries have supported his campaign... should not be underestimated".

Many point to his running mate and Mr Widodo's son, Mr Gibran. A constitutional court, where Mr Widodo's brother-in-law serves as chief justice, controversially cleared the way for the 36-year-old to run for vice-president - Indonesian law requires him to be older.

What also worries many is a return of the "old Prabowo", known for his hot temper and volatile personality.

Dr Warburton says some of his recent public appearances had hints of that.

"No-one knows how Prabowo will govern," she says. "He may be a very hands-off president most interested in the prestige and pomp of office; but most who know him well emphasise his unpredictable personality. And that's never good for governance."

[wild-moss-art]

how did you start advertising your comms?

I just started posting about it mostly! It is hard to get traction at first but I started studying how other people advertise theirs, who is successful and what I like about their approach, etc.

I found that the best way to catch people’s attention is having a pretty, attention grabbing, and concise sheet with all the information. I include pricing, examples, rules, and payment methods. I also find that limiting the number of comm slots open is good for both generating interest(scarcity) and my own mental health(obvi can’t have too many in the queue at one time).

Having payment methods set up beforehand is also important; I use paypal, ko-fi, and venmo and have had people wanting to use all 3! Ko-fi has been the most popular because I think fandom people are generally used to using it. Might incorporate Zelle in the future if people want it, just cause I have it set up and use it with my friends already. It’s worth noting that in any payment method you will use, you and your patrons full legal names will be visible to each other, so be prepared for that.

I always am trying to improve my approach though, and I think next steps are gonna be having a carrd with a queue so people can look at where the progress of their piece is without having to bug me for an update(to be clear I don’t mind when people want an update at all, but I know not everyone wants to be constantly asking). AND if anyone who has or hasn’t commissioned me has any feedback on my approach, I’d love to hear it 🙏

Generally the most important step is to just go for it and just put yourself out there, even if you don’t feel ready. You will never feel ready, and there’s always gonna be stuff you’ll learn along the way, so you just have to embrace it. One thing that helps me is always being open to feedback, and I’ve gotten plenty of good advice from friends and patrons.

Feel free to hit me up if you have any more specific questions too!! 💖

[maddie-grove]

I get why people don't like the "list of tropes" method of recommending/advertising/describing a novel, but it's weird to me that it's so popular to say "this tells me nothing about the plot" when the recc/blurb/whatever contains things like "enemies to lovers" (i.e., a type of plot). Maybe it's from reading 20 Master Plots as a kid, or from keeping a spreadsheet of romance novels for the last fourteen years, but if someone tells me "this is a revenge story" or "this is a marriage-of-convenience romance novel," I'm like, okay, yeah, I know the extremely bare bones of what this is. The problem is that I usually want more context to go with that very basic plot description. Why is it convenient for these characters to get married? What's their deal going in? What's the time period?

[caw4brandon]

How AI Kills Creatives

Human beings love to express themselves in many unique ways. From dance, to singing, to creative writing and of course, by art. Artists wrestle everyday to stay relevant to the masses while doing their favorite hobbies to earn a living.

This however may become null and void as the art community is facing another difficult challenge that could put them into jeopardy. The answer as to what can pose a danger to our beloved creative types is the hot topic for this Wednesday's piece. Let's discuss the complex situation of AI Art.

- Being a Creative Online -

For as long as I can remember, Creative work is either something industrial for advertisements or for entertainment, like comic books or animated shows. Often times, it involves expressive and also very dead people of influence like [Van Gogh], [Picasso] and [Da Vinci]

This however changed when the world was introduced to the internet. Allowing creative work to be presented to the masses, pass the borders and beyond. A timeless time capsule of creativity that can reach places traditional methods failed to do at rapid speeds.

Places like [Artstation], [DeviantArt], [Behance] and [Pixvi] are some of the most popular websites where aspiring artists can produce and express their craft to be shared and may potentially, give them the confidence to do commissions. These sites laid out a platform that can attract beginners and professionals alike for a chance to find an audience and develop themselves. This however, doesn’t mean an easy climb.

Creators need to combat against the algorithm and the occasional critics of these respective sites to be recognized. Creators need to claw their way out of the crowds to be graced by algorithm which means, they probably need to churn out backlogs of content to be seen and favored.

- Rise of The AIs -

A few years ago, I stumbled across a program called [Artbreeder]

Its a free to use program that allows you to create close to realistic portraits or stylized artworks by using a base picture and some photo manipulation for the desired effect. 

I myself have also used Artbreeder to create a version of my character; Sadie mac Lir based on the game version of her in HPHM.

Around that time, there was also the discovery of the mix and match dress up site by the name of [Picrew] which I too have used on more than one occasion. As time went on, better and smarter programs start appearing. Thus, allowing the masses to create scuffed or impressive images of whatever they so wish. From OCs to potential future babies to fiction turned real characters. 

At frightening speeds, AI programs created by intelligent software and application builders have grown to observe and steal from artists in various parts of the world to produce excellent works of art within seconds. Thus, threatening the very livelihoods of those who produce art as a job.

Enter the most controversial AI Art program [Lensa AI by Prisma Labs] Who is accused by multiple professional artists for committing art theft. Using the styles, compositions and signatures of said artists to reproduce works under the program's watermark.

- This is Art Theft! -

First, let's make a few things clear. I am not an expert to the subject of AI Art Theft but I highly recommend reading these few posts by better experts who can explain things better than me.

You can read [Megrae's Post] and [Jonlamart's Post] to gain a better understanding of the situation. From here on out however, I will be using my own words to breakdown how this can potentially kill the Creative community at large in the long run. Including us little guys.

To loosely summarize, the application takes a massive data collection of posts created by professional artists to be learned and recreated. Infamously, the application uses works of art by the late [Kim Jung Gi US] and others without the respective artist's permission to gain traffic and profit.

The disturbing factor in question, is that the developers of Lensa AI created this application with data that is NOT CONSENTED for such use. The program blatantly steals the artistic skills and styles of the Creative, allowing instant results via prompts which puts Creatives into obscurity. And, this is just the beginning.

Heaven knows, if the big guys in this industry are not safe from this AI. The time will come, where even small time artists will suffer such a fate.

Worst still, it places the general world view that the art community is an irrelevant industry. It takes away the trouble and cost of doing commissions and requests be a lot more to the AI's favor.

Looking into it further, a video essay by [Ana Isabel] (Which I highly recommend you watch as well) showed several other AI programs that has gotten better into writing articles via processing a database of samples and a few keywords. Thus, removing the need for a creative writer. (Like I am right now) 

What we are looking at right now is, for the first time in history. We are at odds of replacing Creatives from job opportunities. With these programs available, the phrase "Any Tom, Dick and Harry can do it" has gotten too close for comfort.

- Arguments Against AI Art -

Of course, the application can't work without us Creatives feeding the program samples and data. In some way, it still requires some form of human creativity to feed it data and develop and it also requires a little bit of luck to trigger the right prompt.

As stated in Ana Isabel’s video, some artists welcome the AI as an additional tool to help lay some groundwork for the artist to improve and build upon. Which creates a new label; [CyberArtist] or Cyborg Artist. 

Their argument is that the AI can be a helpful tool to conceptualize ideas as a first draft in productions or help with small time gigs such as promotional art or E-flyers. These Cyborg Artists also pointed out that AI Art will set a unique benchmark for what “good art” actually is, focusing more on the concept/ prompt than the process of creation.

Tempting as it may to say the world cares more about the idea than the craft. This is still detrimental to small timers or freelancers who want to pursue art as a profession with their own new ideas. It can discourage new and rising artists from chasing their ventures as they will be aware of the competition upon them.  

The comment; “it won't happen because, MY art is not that great" is not the point. If I were to guess. The AI will absorb any artwork that emits a large following and activity as food for the AI to feed and replicate which might even include doodles if left unchecked.

Although, not all hope is lost. As with these new improvements arise new problems. For that, new laws and new policies are being made to combat this troubling issue. Though not effective, it does raise the awareness. What is very important is that the general public must be made aware of such an issue. The world still looks down on Creatives, and sees their work as still "just a hobby" which is why this awareness needs to be raised and why we need to prove we are better.

On a hopeful note, AI is but an imitation of what is considered as great art but the one thing it can't ever do is produce Personal Art. It can't emote the hard hours spent, the process of improvement, the personalized charm, and the very heart that the artist cares about the audience.

That is something the AI CAN’T ever do. Its easy to feel fear knowing that the days as a Creative is numbered now that everyone can have access to such a program and to some, it may even be disheartening. But be aware that the True Value of an artist is the heart they have to share their craft. To show the imperfections and to do so anyway because they believe it inspires people. That is perhaps, what AI Art can’t ever kill.

To give because they enjoy the fun of it.

Thanks for reading

- Caw4B -