#the election results were not really ''improv'' because they had different plans based on what happened. the festivak and nov 16th were | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

the-redeemed-anon · 3 years

Text

Welp, since we got Wilbur back, let’s take a look at Eight

As a disclaimer, I’ll talk about the character, and if I mention the CC, I will label his name accordingly.

Okay, since the pog thing that happened on the 29th of April, and a couple of bad takes have already started to pop up Jesus Christ guys why do you want the dude that just got back to life after being trapped in limbo for over a decade to get beaten up violently- I think it’s appropriate to bring attention to the thing that gave me my pseudonym and my belief that we may get a redemption/healing arc for Wilbur: the song Eight, by Sleeping at Last.

Why this song matters, you may wonder. Well, it’s a song that we have confirmation to have been CC!Wilbur’s personal inspiration for his character, as said by CC!Wilbur himself. Not only does that give us insight into how and why Wilbur acted in certain ways in Season 1, but it also gives us the opportunity to see the inner turmoil he went through and still will.

Now keep in mind that this is just my interpretation of the song, other people may see the song differently, but overall looking at this song and looking for meaning into it I think is very useful if you plan to analyse Wilbur or even write about him. It truly gives you a lot of insight and context for how he was. Here is a link to it for you to listen to it, before I dive into the analysis.

First, let’s see what Eight is about, as a song. The song is about Type Eight of the Enneagram of Personality, which is basically a system that defines 9 different personality types. Sleeping at Last made a song for each Enneagram, actually, but we’re here to talk about Type 8 (also bear in mind I am not an expert in psychology, so I am not here to comment on the validity of this system. I’m here just to analyze a song lol).

What is Type 8 (aka a bit of analysis on Wilbur outside of the song)

Type 8 is often called the Challenger or the Protector. This type is characterized by a want to not show vulnerability, to have power. Their deepest fear is to not be in control of themselves, to be harmed, to be vulnerable, and their desire is to be in control of themselves, their life/destiny. They want respect over status, value loyalty and they want to make an impact on the world. You can start to see some core characteristics of Wilbur in this description.

We also have levels, from healthy to unhealthy, with which we can see what a Type 8 person can behave like.

Healthy Type 8 people act like a protector for others, they are the strong leaders, the challengers of oppression, the people who don’t stand for injustice in their communities. You can say they are the natural leader type, and I think you can start to see inklings of Wilbur’s personality from early Season 1 here. He started L’Manberg to challenge what he saw as tyranny. When Wilbur described the reasons he cared about L’Manberg, we can also notice that the values he lists align with the core desires of a Type 8: the desire to have control over their life, and not allow others to control them. By making L’Manberg to “stick it to the man“, Wilbur is very stereotypically a Type 8.

Average Type 8 people aren’t as open as someone on the healthy level is. Showing weakness is unacceptable. They may see relationships as the next challenge they need to surpass, and can come easily off as intimidating and ambitious to peers. To me, this sounds a bit like Wilbur after the War, before the announcement of the Festival. He was more closed off around that time, and you could argue that the Elections were a part of his ambition to prove that people respect him, that he can do this, rule a country. The new revelation that Wilbur was lying in his letters to Phil, about the Elections and the formation of Pogtopia also shows that he didn’t want to show weakness, to disappoint or worry his father.

Unhealthy Type 8 people become so closed off that they are intimidating and can appear tyrannical from the outside, often disregarding the feelings of others. They pursue power, and when someone stands in their way, they are cold and become quite antagonistic. They may issue empty threats in their pursuit for power, and their already existing relationships are turned into tests, where the only option is to pass or to fail, with no in-between. This can result in them being abandoned, and them accepting this as being better this way, to be alone. They can force themselves into loneliness.

If this sounds terribly familiar and recent, well... Wilbur, ever since the “Then let’s be the bad guys“ speech, has exhibited the traits of an unhealthy Type 8. Even now, post-resurrection, while he is trying to improve on himself, a lot of his traits remain or have worsened, due to staying in limbo for 13 years. He still has a persona under which he hides his issues, and as I have said in another post, he’s the emotional equivalent of a snail, you poke him gently and he completely retreats in his shell. Wilbur has actively driven people away from him for being so confrontational, and this can be seen again with Ranboo. All in all, Wilbur is definitely cozy in that section of the Type for now.

I also want to talk separately about three things:

1. The Pit

I won’t lie, the Pit is probably the most extreme thing Wilbur did to this date. It’s Wilbur at his lowest point morally and mentally, reveling in his brother figure fighting a much tougher opponent and losing. I won’t sit here and say he was right, nor am I gonna condemn you for your opinion on the Pit, but, when you look at Wilbur’s enneagram, the Pit and why it happened makes sense. What happened right before? The Festival. The Festival was meant to be the time Wilbur either blew up Manberg or left it be, based on Tubbo’s call. Wilbur prepared for those two scenarios, and felt in control of the situation... then it all went horribly wrong. The situation spiraled wildly out of Wilbur’s grasp and it ended with the death of Tubbo and the possibility of Techno being on Schlatt’s side.

This started a breakdown fueled by paranoia that led to the Pit, to Wilbur goading Techno and Tommy to fight. The question is, why? Why do that?

To regain control. Wilbur, in my opinion, did that in an attempt to regain control, after the Festival slipped so hard from his grasp, no matter his effort to keep control of it. That was his urge, that was his need in the moment, no matter how messed up it was, he may have felt like this was necessary. Remember, the core fear of Eights is to not be in control of their own life and destiny, to be puppeteered by someone else. This is why the Pit happened, when you acknowledge the fact that Wilbur was unstable mentally, and he is the type of person to want control.

2. The want to protect others

This is a quality of healthy Eights that still shines through with Wilbur, but it’s sadly overshadowed by his more antagonistic or morally darker actions and quotes.

Wilbur was naturally a protective person. Because Eights challenge authority, this makes them see the world as being inhabited by those who are strong and those who are weak, and not in a bad way. Eights consider themselves part of the strong ones, because they stand up for themselves, but because they see the world also inhabited by the weak, they have the urge to protect them. They also stand up for whom they think can’t stand up for themselves on their own, they think they are responsible for the protection of others.

And when you look at Wilbur, this shines through. He made himself President, and while no one protested, he did it because he felt he was the one fit for the role. Even at the time this scene happened, you can see why Wilbur would have perceived Tommy, Tubbo and Fundy as weaker than him: Fundy was his son, and Tommy and Tubbo, no matter the age intended at the time, were always viewed as younger than him, not to say, Tommy had just lost 2 lives back-to-back. Therefore, Wilbur put himself in charge and with the duty to protect the nation and its people, as the President.

Wilbur even says this in the flashback from Quackity’s stream:

[“What has made you do everything you’ve done up to this point?” (Quackity)

“That’s a- That’s a big question. Um. I guess it’s just protection for my people. I mean, I- I- I just want to see them thrive, and I want to see them safe.” (Alivebur) - (Quackity’s Killing My Enemies: 1:03:02, 12th Apr)]

It’s clear, Wilbur has a desire to protect his nation, and, by extension, his people, his friends, especially with the following quote once Quackity replies: [“Your aspirations of optimism are not going to be subject to my nation’s security I’m afraid. I- I completely disagree with everything you’ve said.” - (Quackity’s Killing My Enemies: 1:05:18, 12th Apr)] He keeps hammering in the idea that he did what he did to protect and offer safety to his friends. That’s why he needed power: [“If you want to really help people, you’re gonna need power, Quackity.” - (Quackity’s Killing My Enemies: 1:05:42, 12th Apr)]

And again, this happens even after the “Then let’s be the bad guys“ speech. Even though he initially says he wants to kill everyone at the Festival, when confronted with this on the day of the event, he second-guesses himself. He doesn’t want to hurt his friends, he doesn’t want to hurt people weaker than him. He distrusts Tubbo, but the moment Techno fires the first rocket, he’s shocked, appalled and moves to go to the button, while urging Tommy to act. When Schlatt wants to kill Niki, he steps out and offers himself to be killed and no one else be harmed.

Even the act of pushing the button himself, there are Wilbur analysts who have pointed out that Wilbur may have wanted to be stopped. And even then, the explosion created no casualties, thanks to all of them wearing armor.

In the Void, Wilbur talks about how he’s evil, how the server is better off without him. He recognizes himself as a hazard, and while that is a part of his self-loathing and hatred, you can also see his care for others shine through: he didn’t want to come back at the time, because he thought he would bring back conflict, suffering [“Here’s the thing, I genuinely think, if it weren’t for me and you dying right, the server would be in shambles. I know for a fact that if I come back, or if I’m brought back to life in some way it’s definitely gonna just go [shit again]” “I know what I’m like, that’s the issue.” - (Tommy’s am i dead?: 10:29, 4th March)]. By staying dead, at this point, he was continuing to prevent weaker people from being harmed.

Even now, post-resurrection, we can see this, but, well...

3. Opinion on Dream

I have looked at this before, from the angle of Wilbur’s mentality. We all know his opinion on Dream so far, that he would have killed him on the spot for what happened to Tommy in the Exile, but Wilbur still considers him his hero. While I said at the time that it may be a subtle way for Wilbur to cloak his self-loathing and self-hatred, but now I want to look at the first part again, from the perspective of Type 8:

Wilbur, by having the urge to kill Dream on the spot, for what he did to Tommy in Exile (and, keep in mind, Ghostbur wasn’t there for all of it, so Wilbur did not see the destruction of Logsted and why it happened, or how Tommy was completely isolated from everyone after the party, and Tommy referred to Dream as his owner to Mexican Dream), no matter what he says after about Dream, proves that he still has the quality to want to protect the weak.

Dream, as always, is one of the strong people of the server. He’s the owner, he has a lot of items and good gear, and in general, everyone recognizes him with a level of danger he presents, and power. Tommy, on the other hand, is one of the weaker ones.

While Tommy has valuable traits, like his loyalty, his fierce determination and the will to keep moving despite how low life kicks him at times, one can’t deny that, in general, Tommy is viewed as one of the weak. He doesn’t have that many powerful items, he isn’t physically that strong, people constantly pick on him, and he is one of the minors of the server, the youngest of them, in fact. Add to that the humiliation of Exile and the treatment he was put through, Tommy was not only at his weakest then, but also at his most vulnerable.

Why would it be a surprise then for Wilbur to want to gut Dream, considering the above? Tommy and Wilbur were very close. As Wilbur acknowledged in the latest stream: [“We were a family, Tommy. We were…” - (Wilbur’s resurrected gentleman of L'manburg: 27:26, 5th May)], they were once so close they could have been brothers. Tommy stuck with Wilbur as a right hand man, he was the only one who didn’t give up on him in Pogtopia, no matter if he thought his choices were right or wrong, and Wilbur confided in Tommy a lot. Now take this little brother figure he had in Tommy, and put him through Exile.

Of course Wilbur would want to gut Dream, Tommy may as well be part of his family, and Wilbur doesn’t strike me as the kind to want his loved ones in pain, genuinely. He may dismiss the feelings Tommy has sometimes, but his reaction to Exile shows that he isn’t blind to suffering. He saw it and recognized as harmful and damaging to Tommy, unprompted by anyone else.

He even makes a comment that I think may be important in the future: [“Tommy, I’m not, I’m not- I wasn’t blind, I saw what he was doing to you, Tommy. I saw. I saw what he was doing to Tubbo. I saw what he did to me.” - (Wilbur’s resurrected gentleman of L'manburg: 21:08, 5th May)]. Remember, Wilbur right now is deeply conflicted, I don’t think he’s properly sorted his feelings on Dream yet. He, in this quote, recognizes he saw how Dream treated Tommy, Tubbo and himself. While Eights want to protect the weak, their core fear is being controlled or harmed by others. I am very curious what will happen if, or, when, Wilbur will decide that Dream is also a hazard to himself, or if Dream will try to use Wilbur for his own plans. But, this is starting to deviate from the purpose of this post so, with that out of the way...

The lyrics:

I remember the minute It was like a switch was flipped I was just a kid who grew up strong enough To pick this armor up And suddenly it fit

Here, Wilbur’s arc and story begins. The lyric recount the moment Wilbur’s spiral began: the Final Control Room. He remembers that betrayal up to his death, still calling Eret a traitor and quoting him, with the same quote he used: “It was never meant to be”. This moment is what will define and shape Wilbur throughout Season 1, and even now. The switch mentioned is the button pressed, the moment everything changed. “I was just a kid” is Wilbur recognizing that he was not ready for the role of President, sentiment reflected by the rest of the lyrics: “who grew up strong enough/To pick this armor up”. Wilbur forced himself to bear the title of president, like a suit of armor, something that protects you, and helps you to fight for others, until “suddenly it fit”.

God, that was so long ago, long ago, long ago I was little, I was weak and perfectly naive And I grew up too quick

Here Wilbur internally recognizes that time passed, his ideology changed, as evident the quotes from Quackity’s stream: [“You say, you say everyone has a good side, Quackity. And you’re right, you’re right, everyone has a good side, but that good side is only there to help themselves. If you want to really help people, you’re gonna need power, Quackity. You can make a movement, you can make a resistance, right, you can go out and you can come back, and they’ll give you a ticker tape parade. They’ll cheer for you in the streets, but you will change nothing. If you have a revolution, everyone will hate you, you will sacrifice everything, and you will lose everything you’ve ever had, but you’ll come back and everything will be changed. And Quackity, if you want to change things, you’re gonna need power. That’s what you want, really, isn’t it? Look at me. And power isn’t gaining from diplomacy, and bureaucracy, and giant courthouses suspended in the sky, blah blah blah. It’s gained from swords, Quackity. It’s gained from blades, it’s gained from steel, iron. Even if everyone has this good side that you’re talking about, then anyone who wants to prove it, has to show their dark side first. You’re going to have to kill, you’re going to have to torture, you’re going to have to maim.” - (Quackity’s Killing My Enemies: 1:06:34, 12th Apr)]. Yet, even if this happened so “long ago, long ago, long ago”, he “grew up too quick”, because the change was too sudden, and it didn’t occur naturally.

Now you won't see all that I have to lose And all I've lost in the fight to protect it I won't let you in, I swore never again I can't afford, no, I refuse to be rejected

I think this verse refers to the Election and its fallout. He quite literally loses a lot on that day, not only his country and his second life, but seemingly, his son, because Fundy takes down the walls. Wilbur also lost a lot in the Independence War, as he lost his first life in there, his son and allies lost their lives too, and this created the perfect environment for paranoia around trust to form. Wilbur, at this point, swears to not let himself be vulnerable with anyone again, or to fully trust people, because of what happened in the Final Control Room and at the Elections. The last line is Wilbur deciding to go ahead and start Pogtopia, to reclaim his nation. As you may remember, the Election was held so that Wilbur could legitimize his presidency, because he felt people started to not listen to him anymore, and an election, in his mind, would have fixed that. Due to his paranoia, and depression, Wilbur couldn’t afford to lose, because the presidency was one of the things that gave him happiness and helped him function. Once he lost and was banished, he decided to strike back and take back the country, or, as the lyrics say, “I refuse to be rejected”.

I want to break these bones 'til they're better I want to break them right and feel alive You were wrong, you were wrong, you were wrong My healing needed more than time

People who’ve broken a bone before may be familiar with this, but there is a possibility for a broken bone to heal incorrectly, so, when that happens, the bone is broken again and you try again. What that lyric means is that Wilbur was not healing properly, and he was constantly damaging himself again, to restart the process, to make his bones stronger, to make himself better. The “feel alive“ part, in my opinion, goes hand in hand with the fact that Wilbur was... not in the best place mentally in that time. We all know how he died, and, to be honest, a lot of the morally bad things Wilbur did could be argued to have been done to give him something to live, be it thrill or satisfaction. The last two lyrics, I feel, are directed to Tommy; Wilbur needed more than just time to “come back around“, and we know how Season 1 ended.

Now, this may be a controversial take, but... This is the end of Wilbur’s Season 1 arc. I think this is as far as Wilbur’s parallel to Eight went in Season 1, it’s the Pogtopia Era, up to November 16th. You may say that it’s his unfinished son- *gunshots*

Okay, okay, but what does that mean for the rest of the song? Well... It could be that either CC!Wilbur will stop with the Eight parallels here, or, the version I like, it means that the rest of the song is a hint for insight into how Wilbur feels and how his character will change in the future.

When I see fragile things, helpless things, broken things I see the familiar I was little, I was weak, I was perfect, too Now I'm a broken mirror

This is Wilbur recognizing that he is not okay, internally, which we know is a thing in canon, because of this quote from the Resurrection stream: [”Are you trying to- Are you trying to make me- Tommy, are you trying to make me- You remember that time in the cave? Are you trying- Are you trying do- Are you trying to make me feel like I did back then, in Pogtopia? Are you trying to- Are you trying to make me feel as bad as I did back then? ‘Cause it’s not gonna work!” - (Tommy’s Breaking Into Prison To Kill Dream: 59:06, 29th Apr)] It’s a great step for Wilbur, afterall, healing starts when you recognize you have a problem, so you can begin fixing it, but, as we know...

But I can't let you see all that I have to lose All I've lost in the fight to protect it I can't let you in, I swore never again I can't afford to let myself be blindsided

Wilbur is the emotional equivalent of a snail. Here we see “Snailbur” doing a reprise of the third paragraph, which I linked to him in the Election Era and its fallout. From the way the lyrics are worded, we can see the how similar they are, but there is a difference: reluctance. Wilbur knows he’s not okay, but he can’t reach out for help, because then, he’ll be showing weakness, but he wants to open up. “Now” becomes “but”, “I won’t let you in” becomes “I can’t let you in”. Now he’s not afraid of rejection, he doesn’t want to be blindsided, which I didn’t know at first what it meant, because my native language is not English, but when I looked it up I came across this definition: “to surprise someone, usually with harmful results”. This shows us something important: Wilbur is hiding his true feelings because he’s afraid to not be hurt again. He doesn’t want another Final Control Room or Election to happen to him.

I'm standing guard, I'm falling apart And all I want is to trust you Show me how to lay my sword down For long enough to let you through

This set confirms it, Wilbur is on the defense now, he’s defending from potential hurt, and the second part of the first lyric is hinting at what a lot of Wilbur analysts have pointed out and we are prepping for: Wilbur having a big crash from the high he’s experiencing from getting resurrected, he’ll be “falling apart“, he’ll be vulnerable, and open to hurt, or... Redemption. This is it. This is the section that made me insist and theorize about a redemption/healing arc: that second lyric, continuing with the rest: Wilbur is reaching out to someone or some people, that he can put his trust to. Wilbur doesn’t just need someone willing to redeem him, because we had that in Pogtopia, with Tommy, no, Wilbur also needs himself to open up, trust people and ask for help. And that is exactly what happens in the last two lyrics: Wilbur is asking for help to open up and let people help him.

Here I am, pry me open What do you want to know? I'm just a kid who grew up scared enough To hold the door shut And bury my innocence But here's a map, here's a shovel Here's my Achilles' heel

And here we have it. Wilbur opening up. Wilbur finally letting someone in, admitting he’s scared, he’s scared of hurting again, comparing himself to a kid. This one I find very symbolic, because if he, at the beginning, was a kid, then by admitting he is a kid at this stage, he’s the same person he was at the beginning, with the good he had, with the flaws he had, what he did and the trauma he gained will never erase that. The innocence in this part of the song, I think is Ghostbur. People forget, but while Ghostbur seems to be a separate entity, he’s still very much a version of Wilbur. He has a lot of his memories, his happy ones. Wilbur and Ghostbur are the two sides of the same coin, different, yet so much alike. You need both to understand the other. Wilbur has the capacity to be innocent, to be kind, good, he just... buried these qualities, and someone has to help him dig them up, when he is ready to open up. I don’t think I need to explain the meaning of someone showing you their Achilles’ heel, beside the fact that it means they trust you with their life. Wilbur needs to find someone to trust.

I'm all in, palms out I'm at your mercy now and I'm ready to begin I am strong, I am strong, I am strong enough to let you in

Here, I think we see Wilbur accepting the consequences of his actions, of the hurt he caused, because, while he’s not irredeemable, he did hurt people, and he needs to be open to them not forgiving them, but, as the song says, just then he’ll be “ready to begin” his healing and redemption. And right at the end there, “I am strong” is repeated thrice, he’s ready to heal, to be vulnerable with someone. It’s the redemption in full swing from here to the end.

I'ma shake the ground with all my might And I will pull my whole heart up to the surface For the innocent, for the vulnerable And I'll show up on the front lines with a purpose

Remember what I said, about healthy Eights? Champions of the people, natural leaders, challengers of oppression and protectors of the weak? This is what Wilbur should become at the end of the redemption, if we are to follow the song. He’s gonna put all of his strength into fighting for what’s right, and he’ll open up, he will heal. We’ll be back to fighting for “the innocent, for the vulnerable”, he’ll have a purpose to fulfill. L’Manberg was deeply tied to both Wilbur and Ghostbur, and Wilbur himself admitted to caring about L’Manberg because what it stood for. Now, L’Manberg is gone, but those ideals aren’t. Maybe, just maybe, he’ll fight in the future to protect those ideals.

And, finally:

And I'll give all I have, I'll give my blood, give my sweat An ocean of tears will spill for what is broken I'm shattered porcelain, glued back together again Invincible like I've never been

I really like the end here. Because, it’s not only reinforcing the idea that Wilbur will be redeemed, but that penultimate lyric always stood out for me: “I'm shattered porcelain, glued back together again”. Porcelain is, while very fragile, a beautiful material. When I think of the word, I think of beautiful vases, handcrafted with skill and care. It’s a shame when a porcelain vase breaks. But, just because something is broken, it doesn’t mean it can’t be repaired. And when I think of repaired porcelain, I think of the Japanese art of kintsugi - a technique with which broken pottery is glued in such a way that the cracks aren’t hidden, but celebrated as a part of the object’s history, by filling them in with gold. I like to think that at the end of his healing arc, Wilbur will be similar, he was broken, he healed, but the scars are still there, and, even then, he’ll be thriving again. It’ll be an experience that, overall, helped him become better. And the final lyric: “Invincible like I've never been“, I like to think that this will be him at his peak: healed, happy, ready to take life by the horns, like he wasn’t before. It’s a hopeful, happy note to finish the song and his story on.

And that is my analysis on the song and the enneagram, I guess (Jesus this got waaay longer than I expected). I really hope Wilbur will get a redemption arc, it’s already wonderful that we have him back AND he wants to live (it’s honestly the first time I see, in any media, a suicide victim that not only is brought back to life, but they are happy to be back). Hopefully this is useful to people, and, as always, thanks to @kateis-cakeis for compiling Wilbur’s/Ghostbur’s quotes in a masterlist with timestamps and anything you’d want to know about them. It’s a goldmine of analyzing Wilbur and I highly encourage you to check it out.

#dream smp #dsmp #wilbur soot #dsmp wilbur #dream smp analysis #dmp analysis #dream smp character analysis #dsmp character analysis #finally... after 3000 years... the Eight analysis is complete #this took so long I am sorry lmao #now I can go focus on schoolwork #and before someone says it I'll say it #snailbur effervescent

128 notes · View notes

katyatalks · 4 years

Text

Mob Psycho 100 Interview Translation - Character Designer Kameda Yoshimichi - Otome Visual 2017

Summary-style translation for Character Designer Yoshimichi Kameda’s 4 page interview from Otome Visual 2017, regarding elements in the creation of Mob Psycho 100 such as: what inspired this cover art, the influence of fan art in the anime’s creation, Tsubomi’s design, the process behind the package art for the DVDs, and more. Includes some genga. Under read more;

[TN: The reason why I elected to summarise this interview rather than do a full write up is because a lot of the information given gets covered in December 2016′s Animestyle010, in “The Making of Mob Psycho 100.” I typed that one out in full over on twitter but that’s a long interview, and I don’t have the time or energy to reformat it for Tumblr, but if you’re interested in a very in-depth look into how Mob Psycho 100′s anime came to be I’d really recommend checking it out. Direct quotes are given in “” here. Enjoy!]

---

*~The genga illustration for Otome Visual’s cover~*

“With the recent popularity that Skating Anime has had, what’s this - a Shouwa idol collab?! It’s all in the little details in their clothing - their wrinkled shirts, white trousers, black belts - both around their waists and arms.”

*~Kameda’s comments~*

“Can you heaaaar me!! I am currently speaking directly into your braaaain!!! What I’m grateful for with this commission is I was able to design the cover in any way I’d like!! A cover is a reflection of current times, so, of course, I went for ice skating! You wouldn’t be able to find this kind of amazing content in any time period other than now! That’s what I first thought! Like, Mob Psycho 100!! If there’s not a certain Mob Psycho 100-ness present in the art then what’d be the point, so, the characters are being very serious but they’re also pretty laughable. I tried to create a piece of art from which you could hear their voices!!! What’s with it being Shouwa-esque?? Being lame is incredibly cool!!! Huh? Does that describe Mob Psycho 100?? Can’t answer that if you ask!!!! Please feel the amazing Paradise Ginga x Mob Psycho 100-ness here!!!!!!”

---

Kameda describes how he wasn’t sure how best to adapt the manga into an anime format at first, since from the art he was shown he immediately knew it to be very unique - the idea of using Flash to animate the show was raised but quickly shot down

Originally, upon being asked about the show, he based his thoughts on what a web image search for Mob Psycho 100 gave him rather than having the actual manga in hand. “For the most part, the results that came back would be fanart (laughs). It’s a bit strange - at that time, it was difficult to find art uploaded from the manga. If you could find anything, it’d just be art from the covers. So for the most part, an image search of Mob Psycho 100 would just bring you back fanart. A lot of that fanart would be… a shounen in a cool pose wearing a school uniform with smooth bobbed hair & sharp cat-like eyes, sort of like Hiei’s eyes (from Yu Yu Hakusho). Very different from the manga’s art. But when I looked at that art, I thought; this could work. Fanart is, fundamentally, ‘fans drawing what they like’, so I thought, ‘the anime having this kind of art would make the fans happy.’ Well, it didn’t work out that way, obviously. I was told the anime’s art should resemble that of the manga. (Laughs)”

He hadn’t read the manga so all he had for reference was art from volume 1 and the fanart he found online. “But I like things like spirits and urban legends, so seeing Dimple - a floating supernatural fiery ball - and being told the manga touches on the occult caused my interest to soar.”

Says that Teru is the easiest character for him to draw. “He’s overflowing with confidence, so it’s easy to put him into some cool poses. Mob and Ritsu in comparison, not so much. [...] With Reigen, he has a lot of poses that are like, he’s trying to look good. He takes a solid stance. I suppose Spirits & Such has such a shady air to it, and you have to hide that somehow, right? So, Reigen injects confidence into how he presents himself. A model-like stance.”

“The anime is faithful to the manga… ah, actually, Tsubomi-chan was changed with a ‘let’s make her more like a heroine’ conversation. So, I did so, but reading recent events in the manga I can’t picture her in her anime form (laughs). The manga’s Tsubomi isn’t much like a heroine, so I’ve found myself wondering, if we animate up until this part… just how will we approach it? The anime’s Tsubomi is so bright and sparkly, so she wouldn’t have snot hanging from her nose (vol.13 of manga), would she…? (Laughs). Perhaps we went a little too far with making her a heroine. Maybe, if we do season 2, we’ll turn her back into a normal girl (laughs). Well, Tachikawa-san is clever; I think he’ll find a way to make do with her current design.”

---

Picture text: "This is Mezato's first appearance, so I decided to make her cute!! Thank you in advance!!"

Picture text: "That girl was telling me such a stupid story this morning... aidzuchi* isn't easy, you know... I'll just ignore her tomorrow..." [* sounds made to indicate that you're listening to someone speak]

---

Asked about his favourite characters; “I love Mezato Ichi from the Newspaper Club. When I drew her in her character sheet in that pose where she’s holding her camera, I came to see her as being quite cute. So now I focus on her a lot; in fact, when I draw genga I sneakily choose the cuts that have her in them (laughs).”

“I also love Mob. Reigen stands out the most so your eyes naturally jump to him, but I love the balance that Mob has. His heads tall ratio... or rather, his face, and the way his body is proportioned? It makes him lovely. Ritsu is around the same height as Mob, but, how can I put this - the cuteness that Mob has, is lacking in Ritsu… due to the latter being quite standoffish, I suppose (laughs).”

Ritsu’s hair changing through the first season is discussed, and how it is purposefully shortened during the latter half. “I paid attention to making sure his hair was long especially while he was being possessed by Dimple. So it’d resemble thorns.”

“I feel Teru-kun is the most ‘yang’ of all the characters. The rest are more ‘yin’ in nature. Because of this, it’s easy to play around with his expressions - he’s fun to draw. Speaking in terms of Dragonball, he’s kind of like Mob Psycho 100’s Vegeta (laughs).”

“In episode 9, Dimple possesses one of Claw’s security guards, right? I don’t really understand why that security guard is so popular.” Q: What do you mean? “Because he’s just some middle-aged dude (laughs). He doesn’t even appear for long…”

After discussing the huge amount of SG!Dimple commissions received: “Unlike SG!Dimple, I don’t really get asked to draw Shou-kun. With this commission I thought to myself, I /have/ to include him here, and so I added him in. The initial brief excluded him.”

Asked about moments that stuck with him; “When Teru chokes Mob in episode 5. [...] Mob’s pained expression as he’s being choked is good, but Teru-kun’s face shows us… envy, jealousy, distress, anxiety.”

“Also, the ‘super real Reigen’ sequence from episode 12. The tension between Reigen and Sakurai is funny, but the art itself has had me laughing since production. It’s funny no matter how many times I look at it!”

Kameda’s idea to have the characters make number shapes for the volume art came from him watching ‘Tonneruzu no Minasan no Okage deshita’, specifically the ‘Mojimoji-kun’ segment of the show (where they try to make numbers from their bodies)

Volume 6’s cover art was first planned to have a whole ensemble of characters, but Kameda changed his mind on this - “if we do a second season, we can leave that for volume 12 (laughs).”

Volume 4's cover was originally planned to feature only Onigawara and Gouda, but Kameda found himself wanting to include the rest of the body improvement club

Regarding the pose we see on vol 6’s package art, “My original thoughts for that cover were to have Reigen and Mob in a ‘hell wheel’ pose, like, Mob pulling Reigen’s legs and arms… but that wouldn’t be very fitting for the final volume.”

His message to the readers; “Thank you for your support! With sales, the ‘this is popular!’ message gets conveyed, and the more support you give us, then there’s no doubt we’ll be able to produce season 2 and season 3!! Season 2 relies on your support. It’s in your hands - thank you!!”

---

Crossposted on twitter here.

#mp100 #mob psycho 100 #anime visual 2017 #Kameda Yoshimichi #interview #sg!dimple middle age man rights

173 notes · View notes

theonceoverthinker · 4 years

Text

When Will My Life Begin (Fair Game 4/?)

Summary: Tangled AU. Clover Callows has been confined to a tower for all of his life, and given the threat that his Uncle Tyrian says his semblance poses to his safety, he accepts that fate. It’s the only life he’s ever known, after all. But when he’s offered the opportunity to fulfill his greatest dream after a chance encounter with a thief -- or bandit, as Qrow Branwen insists there’s a difference between the two -- both Clover and Qrow will discover joys that they never knew life could offer them before. AO3

Tumblr: (1) (2) (B1) (3)

A/N: Wahoo!!! I managed to get this done on time!!! I hope you all enjoy!

()()()()()()()()()

Clover considered himself pretty knowledgeable when it came to his body.

It shouldn’t have come as a shock to anyone. After all, he spent an awful long time getting to know it without the hassle of constant distractions and a biology book at his disposal since his eleventh birthday that was now in dire need of glue just to keep itself together.

Much of Clover’s life had been spent exploring his physical limits. Exercise was a key part of that, with much of his day used to stretch, work out, climb, pull, and reel. He’d seen the developing muscles across his limbs act as the payoff of that work.

Injuries were another. A child could only be so safe when left alone in a tower for much of a day, and even with the hindsight gained through maturity, injuries as a result of experimentation with what he could and couldn’t do were inevitable. Even when he wasn’t suffering them, he closely studied Raven’s injuries as well as his uncle’s when he could get a peek of or information about their existences.

But all the same, those experiences, both good and bad were fantastic teachers. The human body -- as well as the body of a bird -- was such an interesting thing to Clover. It was frail, yet durable and nuanced in its structure as muscles, bones, nerves and veins all made their homes in an interconnected mass that combined to create a living, breathing, thinking, feeling being. A million things could hurt a body, but a million things could also save it, and that wasn’t even factoring in the effects of semblances, an effect that in all honesty, he only had the vaguest idea about.

Many an hour was spent by Clover studying his book’s diagrams as well as his own growth, thinking about all the possibilities for how that one bodily structure could go about life in such a world as theirs.

So yes, Clover felt he knew the human body -- mostly his -- quite well.

However, despite all of his knowledge about that body, he had no idea how in the world he could possibly slow down the rapid beating of his heart as he approached his uncle.

Well, that wasn’t true. Clover knew plenty of ways to do so, but that rapid beating in his heart made it all the way over to his ears, deafening them to even the thought of any of those methods.

But he didn’t need to hear those methods -- today, he had no problem with letting his anticipation and excitement over asking what he was about to ask fuel the fire in his heart.

He was going to do it.

Oh Gods, he was really going to do it.

“Clover!”

The second time his Uncle Tyrian said his name was noticeably less patient than the first. Clover would be lying if he said it wasn’t just a bit annoying.

To be fair though, that impatience was very much understandable. Uncle Tyrian only had so much time to spend with Clover in the morning before he had to go to work, and he wanted to make sure each and every possible second of it was spent by Clover’s side. The process of getting him up the tower took long enough as it stood, so any further delays on top of it were just an additional hassle, and Clover absolutely felt the same.

Greeting and helping his uncle into the tower was the high point of Clover’s morning, and had been for ages. It not only provided him with the most activity he’d experience until his uncle’s return at sunset, but it gave him a friendly face on top of it all.

“Hello, uncle!” Clover called down to the bottom of the tower. “Looking good today!”

Despite the gentle wind’s efforts, he could hear the light sound of his uncle’s chuckle.

“I’m surprised you can tell one way or the other from all the way up there!” he said. “Bring me up!”

“Of course! Just another second, please!”

Clover quickly grabbed Kingfisher, aiming the weapon with his eyes. Once he was perfectly in place, he held his weapon above his head and behind his left shoulder, and then swung it downward, just as he’d done hundreds and hundreds of times before.

Just as it did everyday, Clover felt the familiar bit of pressure in the reel as Uncle Tyrian clicked Kingfisher’s hook into its usual spot and heard the ever so faint sound of him stepping onto their mechanism’s stone base.

“I’m ready!” Uncle Tyrian called out to him, and with that, Clover started pulling.

Kingfisher’s reel was strong -- it had lifted him plenty of times -- but lifting a person positioned on the heavy stone his uncle stood on was something Clover knew that reel wouldn’t be able to handle. Because of that, for the sake of keeping the reel’s strength and structure intact, Clover elected to regularly pull his uncle up to the tower by reeling in the line with his own two hands, bit by bit.

It was a good thing he had the foresight to take up wearing leather gloves when he pulled.

Whether the thing being pulled was made of the plant stems or metal, rope burn was a pain no one should have to deal with.

Clover lifted his uncle all the way up the tower to its window. As he exited the stone pulley, Clover gently lowered it down again until he was sure he could let it drop without risking cracking the stone itself.

When the task of resetting the pulley was at last done, Clover turned to greet his company.

“Good morning, Uncle Tyrian!” he called out. As Clover approached, Uncle Tyrian took a gentle hold of his head, giving it a kind pat.

“Clover! My boy,” he said through a dramatic, yet goofy sigh, “how you’ve configured that weapon of yours so you can pull me up each and every day, all on your own, I don’t know how you do it.”

“Oh,” Clover waved off as the hug broke, “it’s nothing.”

Uncle Tyrian smiled, almost too sweetly, as he released his hold on Clover. “Then I don’t know why it took so long,” he said, the slightest hint of a sing-song fashion in his voice as his index poked Clover’s nose to a rhythm his uncle developed. Clover frowned, causing Tyrian to laugh. “Oh, boy. I’m just teasing,” he cooed, right before walking himself further into the room.

Clover forced out a chuckle. His uncle had a tendency to joke around with him, no doubt a means of bringing some extra joy to his small and quite lonely world. It wasn’t that Clover didn’t appreciate it...but his uncle’s jokes had a habit of seldom being as funny as Clover imagined his uncle found them -- not to mention, sometimes, it was hard to tell what was a joke and what wasn’t.

Uncle Tyrian was, in a word, opinionated...very, very opinionated. He had something to say about everything, and what he usually said amounted to pointing out what was wrong with or what could be improved about whatever point of discussion came his way.

Of course, he wasn’t without his compliments -- Uncle Tyrian was by no means a cruel man. He appreciated Clover’s meal preparation and how much easier their pulley system made his morning climb than before. Criticisms were just his uncle’s way of trying to make his and Clover’s world better.

And that was a good thing, Clover supposed. Life in a tower or not, there was something to be said for effort and one’s quality of life. If anything, the fact that his uncle gave him critiques showed trust. It was a trust that Clover could improve, do more than he expected to, despite his limitations.

It was inspiring.

Clover just wished the difference between what was supposed to be inspiring and what was supposed to make him laugh was made just a little bit clearer. But perhaps that was a nuance that was more organically recognized in the world outside of the tower.

Uncle Tyrian probably picked it up.

He never would.

No...he would because he was finally going to ask for the chance to see just a glimpse of that world for himself.

It was finally time.

Clover took a deep breath, and finally enacted his plan.

“Uncle Tyrian,” Clover started, following him to the mirror by his closet. “As you know, tomorrow is-”

“Clover,” he interrupted, taking hold of Clover’s shoulder and pulling him beside him in front of the mirror. “Do you know what I see in that mirror? I see a strong, bright, handsome man.” Clover smiled at the unashamed compliment, and let himself lean more into his uncle’s touch.

“Oh look,” he then continued, “you’re there too.” A fit of laughter took over his uncle.

And there was the punchline…

Clover hoped his love for his uncle was something Uncle Tyrian never questioned, but all the same, his uncle really needed to work on his material.

Though he tried his best not to, Clover couldn’t help but drop the fragile smile that he’d built in the span of those few precious seconds before the proverbial other shoe was dropped.

At the sight of that, Uncle Tyrian playfully ruffled his hair. “Oh Clover, I’m just teasing! You really need to work on that oversensitivity of yours.” Uncle Tyrian then stepped away from the mirror and headed towards the breakfast table. “Now, what have you made for us today, boy?”

Before Clover answered, he took a second’s pause for a deep breath, still recovering from his uncle’s joke.

He told himself to relax, reminded himself that today yielded a far bigger prize to focus on, and repeated a sentiment he’d argue many a time in the past -- if his uncle’s questionable taste in comedy was his biggest failing, then Clover would take it with a smile the size of this very tower itself on his face.

Perhaps his uncle was right about his oversensitivity…

Well, if that was the case, then Clover would just have to show him that he could overcome that, too.

Clover smiled, walking over to Uncle Tyrian’s side of the breakfast table and pulling his uncle’s chair out for him.

“I’m so happy you asked,” he said once his uncle was situated, leaning towards the dish. “For today, I’ve prepared for us fresh bread rolls with cinnamon and brown sugar baked into the dough, an apricot spread, and some lemon tea.”

Tyrian hummed, clearly impressed. “Sounds good. And might I add that someone’s feeling confident,” he said, smiling a bit.

“What can I say?” Clover returned. “When I get to make breakfast for the world’s best uncle, I do it well.” He chuckled as he gave his uncle a pat on the shoulder, right before taking off for his own side of the table. As Clover sat down and spread his jam over his roll, he watched his uncle do the same and take his first bite.

He looked pleased.

That was a good sign.

It was now time to try again.

“So Uncle, I-”

Uncle Tyrian moaned in delight. “These are fantastic,” he said through a full mouth, pointing his free hand at the roll in his hand. “Clover, you are a God in the kitchen.”

“Well, you told me my mother was quite the baker. I felt like I owed it to her to try to do the same.”

“You’re a good boy, Clover -- always doing just what your parents wished you to do.”

Clover felt his smile wane.

Yes, he was a good boy.

Yes, he did always do just what his parents wished him to do.

But yes, he was also going to request to defy their dying plea.

It would only be for a single day -- barely a blink of an eye compared to the lifetime he’d dutifully spent in this tower already, and would continue to dutifully spend in this tower once he did it.

All the same though, it was undeniably a defiance he would be suggesting.

What would his parents or his uncle think of that?

Suddenly, Clover found that his heart was quite heavy.

“You know, Clover,” Uncle Tyrian continued, paying Clover no mind. “Your bread is nice, but when’s the last time you cooked up some eggs or sausage? A big, strapping young man needs protein in his diet. ...And so do you!” At that comment, he started laughing again. “I’ll need to pick you up some the next time I go out.”

Clover forced a laugh, trying to regain his metaphorical footing.

What was he thinking, asking to do this?

But then, Clover felt the tiniest bit of heat from behind him.

He had a feeling of its source.

Still, perhaps seeing it with his own eyes would help him make a decision.

Clover grabbed his butter knife and made a move to get some more jam for his roll. However, the knife ‘slipped’ out of his hand just before he could.

Oops.

From across the table, his uncle gave him a wistful shake of the head, one Clover responded to with naught but a shrug of his shoulders, a silly smile, and a chuckle under his breath before ducking under the table to retrieve it.

Once under the table, Clover looked behind him, towards the possible source of the heat he felt on his back.

Sure enough, looking right back at him was Raven.

A bird could only be so expressive. Clover knew that to be true.

However, the look she gave Clover was one that could be nothing else other than pure encouragement.

It did the trick of melting Clover’s anxieties away like honey in a cup of tea.

She was right. He could do this.

‘Thank you,’ he silently mouthed to her just before grabbing the knife and rising back up to the table. Raven gave him a nod from her hiding spot. Clover then grabbed his knife and brought it over to the kitchen area’s sink.

“Uncle,” he said. “Can we talk?”

“It was my belief that we were already talking,” Uncle Tyrian replied, smirking.

Clover returned the smirk with one of his own.

“What was it you always told me about not being a smart ass?” he said, unable to keep the laugh out of his voice.

“I’m not a smart ass,” his uncle returned without so much as a beat passing between them. “I’m just smart.”

Clover had to admit that was actually a good joke.

The two of them shared a laugh. It had been a while since they both did at the same time, and Clover loved the feeling of them unequivocally sharing such a warm moment more than he could ever explain.

And the fact that Uncle Tyrian’s mood had nicely improved as a result of such a moment right before Clover was about to ask him his question didn’t hurt either.

As it turned out, Clover was smart, too.

“So Uncle,” he said when the laughter had at last subsided. “As I’m sure you know, tomorrow is my birthday.”

Uncle Tyrian gave him a look similar to just a bit earlier, confused, but almost sarcastically.

“No, no, no,” he said, shaking his head. “Your birthday was last year. You remember, right?”

Clover gave him a pointed look. “You know birthdays are kind of an annual thing, right?”

“Are they though?”

“Yes, uncle,” he said, half teasing and half tired.

Finally, Clover took a deep breath.

It was time.

“Uncle,” he continued. “I’m turning twenty-one tomorrow, and I wanted to ask.” Clover took a pause to sigh and collect himself.

It was really happening. He almost didn’t know how to process that, let alone ask for it.

All memories of the hours of practice he put into this moment abandoned him.

Oh well, looks like he was gonna wing it.

“What I really want for this birthday,” he said when at last ready. “Actually, what I’ve wanted for quite a few birthdays now…”

Clover could tell that the changes to his voice as a result of his reliance on improvisation pulled down his voice’s pitch and quickened its pace, now sounding like something that resembled a mumble, but he’d hoped Uncle Tyrian wouldn’t call attention to it.

He did.

“Clover, please,” Uncle Tyrian interrupted, dramatically sighing in an unamused tone. “You need to stop with the mumbling. You know how I feel about the mumbling. Everything you’re saying is just ‘Blah-blah-blah-blah-blah.’” he mocked, and in true Uncle Tyrian fashion, as soon as he was done admonishing Clover, Clover knew he was going to go right back to teasing him or praising him or something else, unintentionally deflecting from and further delaying the conversation.

But Clover wasn’t going to let that happen again.

“I want to see the floating lights!”

The words all but flew off of Clover’s lips. If Clover himself didn’t feel himself say them, he wouldn’t have believed that they were actually even said.

However, they were.

For a long moment, everything and everyone in the room basically froze.

He’d said it. There was no taking back the request.

Now, it was a matter of how his uncle would respond.

Clover studied his uncle’s face. It flashed through expressions of shock, confusion, and reluctance over the following few seconds.

He knew he was going to have to argue for his request after he at last vocalized it, so those expressions didn’t surprise him, nor did the single word that followed.

“What?”

It was now on him to elaborate on what he meant, and thankfully, he had the perfect visual representation of that.

Clover swiftly moved over to the curtains, the mask that had shielded a certain painting of his from his uncle for years.

Now though, it was time for that mask to finally be lifted.

Pulling at the curtains, Clover revealed the painting he’d made of himself watching the floating green lights.

“These,” Clover clarified. “I was hoping you could take these floating lights.”

He looked away from his painting and back to Uncle Tyrian, who was now studying it.

However, he did so only for a moment before smiling with recognition.

For the brief moment before his uncle responded, Clover let himself hope.

And then he spoke.

“Oh,” Uncle Tyrian said, nodding as his recognizing smile persisted. “You mean the stars. They are beautiful, but you won’t find a better view of them than you have in your tower.”

“N-no, uncle, please,” Clover said, raising his hand in a stopping motion. He grabbed Kingfisher, unhooking it from the pulley and shot its hook towards the upper part of his tower, where a little door had existed that acted very much like a window. The miniature door not only made for a nice skylight, but also illuminated a sky chart he’d developed.

“I’ve been studying astrology for years now,” he continued, “and whatever these lights are, they aren’t stars. They don’t stay in the sky for weeks or months at a time like stars do. They just appear on my birthday -- only my birthday. And...I just can’t help but feel like these lights and I are connected somehow.”

Clover sighed. He hoped to the Gods that he was making sense.

“Uncle, I need to see these lights, in person, and finally understand what they are.”

He’d never let his passion bleed for anything in his life like how he let it in this moment.

Upon saying those last words, Clover signaled to Uncle Tyrian that he was done speaking as well as thanking him for letting him do so uninterrupted.

Uncle Tyrian took a small pause, and then a deep breath.

“You want to go outside?” Uncle Tyrian clarified, his face and tone neutral.

“Yes.”

“You want to go against your parents’ final wishes for you?” It was said in the exact same way as the previous question.

Clover knew those words were going to come up. He knew his body would take it like ice water down his back, and tried to prepare himself for the feeling.

As it turns out, all the preparation in the world couldn’t make that notion feel any less painful than it did when it was finally out.

However, Clover had also planned out his answer to that inevitable question.

He nodded. “Yes.”

Uncle Tyrian gave him a dark look, filled to the brim with disappointment. “But,” Clover quickly added, “it would only be for a day, and you’d be with me the whole time! I bet you know good places to hide, and quick roads to take if we need to escape! You could keep me safe. So, please? Will you take me?”

Clover prayed that Uncle Tyrian could see the desperation and pure want that coursed through his entire being -- that he could tell that while Clover knew the risks of such a request, he wasn't intending on going through with this plan with naught but a childlike understanding of the world, and that he wouldn’t ask something like this if he didn’t long for it with every fibre of his heart, just like he did now.

Maybe Uncle Tyrian did see that.

He probably did, judging by the look on his face.

That didn’t make his response any easier to hear.

“Oh, Clover,” he said, getting up, approaching Clover, and taking his cheek into his hard, bony hand. “When your poor father -- my brother -- died protecting you, he begged me to watch over his most adored and fragile treasure, and I promised him I’d do everything in my power to ensure your safety for as long as I lived.”

“And, I know, uncle, but-”

“It’s a dangerous world out there, Clover.”

“You’ve told me that, but-”

“So, what else is there to say?” Uncle Tyrian gave him the floor, expectantly looking at him as he waited for a response.

Clover tried desperately to come up with an answer to that...but with every rebuke that came to his mind, he knew exactly what his uncle would say to shoot it down.

His strength? ‘Men out there have four times the strength you do, boy!’

His weapon? ‘That little fishing pole of yours won’t do anything against the weapons those outside the tower have!’

His stealth? ‘What stealth? You’re as subtle as a strike of lightning!’

“I-I just think-,” Clover started, trying once more to argue his point.

And just as some part of him knew it was going to happen, that was as far as he got.

“That’s the thing, Clover,” Uncle Tyrian interrupted, peering straight into his eyes. “You just think, but you don’t know.” With his free hand, Uncle Tyrian placed a hand to his own heart, smiling ever so slightly as he did so. “I do know, and I’m here to keep you safely cocooned from the world.”

Clover’s feelings on the way Uncle Tyrian described the tower they dwelled in was something of a mixed bag. Often, it was fine enough -- a safe place, rustic, unassuming. But when he said things like ‘cocooned,’ it just felt so confining, like a blanket tucked around his too tightly, constricting his arms and chest entirely. It made Clover want to go outside of it more than ever.

In that moment, it served to strengthen Clover’s resolve, however minorly.

“Maybe it doesn’t have to be from all of the world?” Clover suggested, optimistically, yet slowly, in much the same way that one drank a cup of piping hot tea.

Uncle Tyrian laughed.

“Clover, Clover,” he said, patting Clover’s cheek. “You’re such a naive, funny boy, and I love you for that. But the world isn’t so simple to manage -- it never has been. I know you. You’ll let just a little bit of it into your life, thinking it won’t be too much, and then a bit more, and before you know it, the chaos of the world will find its way into this safe haven your father left you, and then you’ll be kidnapped and sold off, or perhaps even worse once they realize that you can’t control your semblance!”

Clover winced, audibly despite his efforts for it not to be.

It wasn’t that he wasn’t aware of the dangers he knew going outside would present. He could never let himself forget, nor would his uncle ever let him forget either. However, being reminded of those very dangers so directly never failed to send shudders down his spine and make his skin feel like it was crawling up it.

...Not to mention, Uncle Tyrian was right about Clover semblance. If anyone knew…

And like his uncle always said, even if they didn’t know...they’d find out, and sooner, rather than later, at that.

“Clover,” Uncle Tyrian continued, “I’m a strong man, but I can only do so much once I’m outnumbered. I couldn’t bear the thought of anything ever happening to you -- not on my watch. And I know you wouldn’t wish to put me in danger, either.”

“O-of course not, uncle,” Clover quickly assured. “I’d never want you to get hurt, especially for me.”

“Nor would I ever want you to be hurt. But don’t worry, Clover. You’re exactly where you belong -- away from danger -- nice, safe, and happy in this tower, and that’s exactly how you’ll stay. Be glad for that, my boy. Not everyone is so lucky.” Uncle Tyrian pinched Clover’s cheek. Clover knew it was meant to be in a joking way, something to lighten the mood between them, but it was just a bit too tight a pinch to do that for his taste. Even still though, Clover forced a chuckle.

“Y-yes, uncle.”

Uncle Tyrian looked at the clock, making a ‘tsk’ noise with his lips and teeth. “Is it eight-forty five already?” he half-groaned.

Clover looked at the clock. Indeed, it was.

That meant it was time for him to leave for work.

“Where does the time even go?”

Unfortunately, Clover had a pretty good idea, and if this conversation solidified anything, it was that that would remain the case for a long time to come.

“No idea, uncle. Let me get the pulley ready for you.” Clover turned away from his uncle as he started to make his way towards the window, trying all the while to desperately eat his frown before his uncle saw it. He succeeded in at least cloaking it behind a neutral expression.

Of course, Clover knew there ran the risk of this plan failing...but experiencing that reality was nowhere near as bad as imagining it had ever been.

He should’ve known it was stupid to try...

“Before you do,” Uncle Tyrian said, his words stopping Clover in his tracks and having him turn back to face him. “I have some good news for you, Clover.”

“Oh?” Clover asked, trying with all his might to simultaneously will his semblance to do something for him and to will his hopes away.

His semblance, as per usual, did nothing of the sort.

“My work is on the lighter side today, so I can come home early. I’ll bring some food, and we’ll have a delicious lunch together. How does that sound?”

On any other day, that would’ve been just about the best news Clover could ever hope to receive.

However, today, in comparison to his wish to see the lights and the clear rejection of that wish by his uncle, it just came off as a consolation prize more than anything.

But how ungrateful was that of him to feel, after all his uncle had done for him?

It wasn’t like Uncle Tyrian was saying no to his request to be mean -- he was just trying to keep Clover safe. And now, here he was, using the little time he had off of work not to treat himself to some alone time, but to instead do nothing more than spend a few extra hours with him.

No, Clover thought to himself, he couldn’t be that cruel, not to a man like that.

He could always just work harder to show his uncle how strong and independent he could be and try again next year.

Quickly, Clover shook all morose feelings away and forced a smile.

“That’s great, uncle,” he said. “I’m really looking forward to it.”

Tyrian placed a hand on Clover’s head.

“I love you,” he said.

Clover felt his smile soften, because it was now completely and utterly genuine.

“I love you too, Uncle Tyrian.” With that, Clover turned around and readied the pulley for his uncle’s trip down.

The good news about the pulley’s reverse trip was that it was a lot less straining on his body and took noticeably less time, too. Within six minutes, Uncle Tyrian was safely on the ground, waving goodbye to Clover as he made his way through the vine-y entrance that shielded the tower from the world, promising Clover before he went too far off to be heard that he’d be back soon. Much like every morning, Clover waved back and watched as he disappeared into the vines.

When he was at last gone, Clover turned, and sat down against the window’s wall.

Right next to him when he landed, Raven stood, placing her uninjured wing on his knee in an act of compassion.

It was an appreciated sentiment, a comforting one...but it also served to remind Clover that he failed in his mission today.

He wouldn’t be seeing the floating lights this year.

In fact, if today’s conversation was anything to go by, he might not see them ever.

At least he still had the view from his window...but that was no longer the comfort that it had been in the years prior.

He’d asked...he’d argued as passionately as he’d ever dared...and had come away with nothing to show for it...

Clover knew a lot about his body.

If only he knew for the life of him how to will the fresh tears he was now shedding away.

#fair game #clover ebi #tyrian callows #rwby #tangled au #lucky charms

13 notes · View notes

blsimonofcascia · 4 years

Text

Christine Mae C. Bagazin

Leaders become great not because of their power but, because of their ability to empower others (John Maxwell). Leaders are the ones who have authority and leads a group of people may it be in a family, a classroom setting, a city or even a nation. They are highly looked up to by the people because of their skills. However, one does not instantly become a good leader. And even sad to say, not all the people who label themselves as leaders, are good ones. However, we must dig deeper in what it means to be a leader and a member for both roles are very vital in every day circumstances. We must thoroughly evaluate different perceptions and narratives about it and there should be a proper assessment of status quo as we came to know and realize what being a leader is really all about.

When we were young, we saw a lot of figures and models that shaped our perceptions of leaders. Usually in cartoons, we identify kings, queens or the monarchy as the authority thus we discern them as leaders or rulers. Characters such as the parents of our favourite prince and princesses like Ariel’s parents or Pocahontas’s parents or Master Shifu in Kung Fu Panda or Li Shang in Mulan are leadership figures in famous cartoon movies. The usual narratives in movies shown for kids display leaders as these people who could command the entire nation to do anything at his/her will or anyone who could have anything that they want. Though this is not exactly the case for all the characters, this has somehow become accustomed. Leaders are shown as these fierce, strong, smart and brave characters and as a young mind watching these films with these types of characters, there is no doubt that we truly admire these personalities even till now when we’ve grown. How these films portray leaders are really vital and important especially to the effect it gives to the mass audience.

Surely in our homes, our parents are considered as the default leaders for they guide us through right and wrong and they are the ones who basically teaches us everything when it comes to basic things and it will be instilled in our mind as we grow older. However, our first take on being leaders would most likely be in school. We get to experience first-hand the ropes of authority and influence. However there is this stigma in school that I am not fond of but it is regularly practiced especially during grade school and high school days. The students who is the smartest are most likely chosen to be the leaders. The reason why this narrative exists is because if you are the smartest of the bunch, you are most likely to properly assess the situation and know what to do hence why they will associate you of being a leader. Especially here in the Philippines, if you are intelligent or when you have high grades and is part of the honor roll, you are put in a higher pedestal than the others. It is because they view intelligence as a high trait and so honor students are highly looked upon in school. However, I have personally experienced and witnessed that this narrative is false because of certain loopholes. Firstly, we must nuance leadership and intelligence. As I have mentioned, since intelligence is put in a high pedestal, most people will think that this is the most vital quality of being a leader. However that is not the case. The most vital quality a leader must have is simply the ability to lead. Qualities like resiliency, integrity, having initiative and more is what sculpts a person to be a great leader. Of course, it is not to say that intelligence does not play a big role in this but that quality could be easily overpowered especially in terms of leadership. To paint a picture, imagine a classroom setting. The group with the top 1 student as a leader is less likely to prosper than a group with a leader that has good leadership skills. The deadlock with this narrative is since because you are smart, you are automatically part of the line of leaders but as we grow older and as we experience different people and leaders alike, we can really say that to become a leader, intelligence is nothing if you don’t know how to properly lead.

I’ve had my fair share of experience with incompetent leaders. One of the most striking experience that I had was in Grade school. We had mandatory scouting and so we had many different activities. Aside from our moderator, we also have classmates who attended special scouting training and are considered ‘leaders’. There was this one activity wherein we were tasked to learn how to knot-tie. The teacher showed us how to do it and we were put into groups so that we could make an output based on the discussion. Since knot-tying was a very complex lesson, each group had about 3-4 leaders to assist in making the output. At that time, I thought the leaders knew how to knot-tie since they basically trained for it and they also claim that they are good at it too. But alas, when we asked for help because we were confused, they started scolding us and telling us that we were not listening properly and that we should find a way to do it. They told us that we should properly make a decent output or else they will be scolded by the moderator. Back then in my 13 year old mind, I was baffled and mad. They have no right to call themselves leaders when they can’t even help us and even scolded us for something that we genuinely don’t know about instead. My perception of leaders shifted because of the leaders that I have encountered when I was in grade six. Even at a young age, it was then that I realized that anyone can become a leader but it takes great skill and hard work to become a great one.

As the years pass by, I had no leadership experience, and I was always just one of the group members. I was satisfied with it, but in Grade 8, I was suddenly chosen to become the science chairman of our class in that grading. Needless to say, I was really a wreck, and I was mostly unsure of the things that I’ve done that time, but rest assured that I tried my very best to serve my classmates and my teachers. Surprisingly, people had good remarks about my leadership, and I was even elected as one of the classroom leaders in 9th grade. From then on, I had taken a lot of leadership roles in organizations and in clubs. I improve more as I took on a lot of roles and responsibilities. My experience had taught me a lot of things, and I could really say that I had become a good and decent leader. I had won awards and gotten recognition, but most of all, I had developed a deep love of service. People might think that people serve leaders because they are the ones who are giving commands and are the ones in charge. However, as I have gained experience through my many leadership endeavors, the people do not serve the leader, for it is the leader that serves the people.

Those experiences of mine are only on a small scale perspective. However, if we look at a wider and bigger spectrum, we can say that being a leader of a large group or a nation is one big responsibility. Not only will you handle a lot of people and a lot of burden, you are also under scrutiny and criticism. A great example of this is political leaders. Political figures such as Pres. Duterte, Vice Pres Robredo, Executive Sec. Medialdea and Mayor Labella are few of the many political leaders running the government of the Philippines. Since we are in a democratic country, it is the people that chooses their leaders. Candidates shows us their vision and plans for the future in hopes that we may choose to vote them. Gullible as we are, citizens here only base their votes in the surface level of things and they don’t properly asses candidates and their backgrounds. Traits like social statutes, popularity and looks are scrutinized more by the people rather than their leadership and political backgrounds. The politician who could give more to the people in terms of monetary value is more likely to win than politicans who give less. And because of these factors, there is no clear reassurance that the politicals leaders who won, are competent and good ones. Morever, as constituents, it is our duty to assess, criticize and overlook their actions for us to be aware and it might serve as their checks and balances.

We all have the right to express and most especially, we have the right to yearn for good political leaders that could properly govern the country. That is why it is really important for us to be aware of what is happening. We have the right to criticize our government leaders if it could lead to the betterment of our country. So let us ask ourselves this: are the government leaders we have right now, enough to make our country prosper? Or do they have their own personal intentions that they want to fulfill instead? Needless to say, we can’t directly and really know their true motives if whether they would really want to serve the country or they are only doing it out of their own personal reasons. The only thing we could do is to assess, criticize and be aware of how they handle our country. In order for us to do this, we must know the proper qualities of a good leader and we must not be ignorant of the current events happening in status quo. Whether it be in a healthy political discourse or a messy fight in Twitter, we must involve ourselves in the discussion and be aware of their actions for it would really reflect in our country.

An example scenario is the very news of Bong Revilla running for senator. Even if he was involved in the Pork Barrel issue and he has cases of plunder, he still won the elections. Now a lot of people claims that he is no fit to be a senator but why was he ever even voted in the first place if people deemed him to be too incompetent? It all goes down to the trait of Filipinos not knowing how to properly assess and choose a proper candidate that results to how they still vote for inaduquate leaders despite their past crimes. Right now, Senator Revilla is still severly criticized but at the end of the day, he got the position and he is the one in authority even if a portion of Filipinos aren’t too fond of him. Sadly, that type of situation does not happen to Senator Revilla only but too a lot of politicians. In the present, our government leaders are struggling to cater to the people in this pandemic and their true colors are peeking to the public of their possible hidden agendas. Truly it is in times of calamity and troubles do we really see how a great leader leads his/her people to better circumstances. If constituents don’t see a good future with these leaders, then just like what I realized when I was in 6th grade in my scouting experience, let us all remember that anyone can be leaders but it takes properly honned skills, a passion for service and a dedication to the people to become a great leader at the very end of the day.

1 note · View note

deniscollins · 4 years

Text

The Hardest Questions Doctors May Face: Who Will Be Saved? Who Won’t?

If you were a medical director and had 10 ventilators with 30 people needing the, thus can only save the life of 10 out of the 30, how would you determine who gets a ventilator by: (1) age (preference to young), (2) highest likelihood of survival, (3) most in need, (4) lottery, (5) first-come, first-served, (6) combination (if so, which ones), (7) something else (if so, what)? Why? What are the ethics underlying your decision?

The medical director of the intensive care unit had to choose which patients’ lives would be supported by ventilators and other equipment. Hurricane Sandy was bearing down on Bellevue Hospital in New York City in 2012, and the main generators were about to fail. Dr. Laura Evans would be left with only six power outlets for the unit’s 50 patients.

Hospital officials asked her to decide which ones would get the lifesaving resources. “Laura,” one official said. “We need a list.” After gathering other professionals, Dr. Evans checked off the names of the lucky few.

Now, she and doctors at hospitals across the country may have to make similarly wrenching decisions about rationing on a far bigger scale. Epidemic experts predict an explosive growth in the number of critically ill patients, combined with severe shortages of equipment, supplies, staffing and hospital beds in areas of the U.S. where coronavirus infections are surging, hot spots that include New York, California and Washington State.

Health workers are urging efforts to suppress the outbreak and expand medical capacity so that rationing will be unnecessary. But if forced, they ask, how do they make the least terrible decision? How do they minimize deaths? Who even gets to decide, and how are their choices justified to the public?

Medical providers are considering these questions based on what first occurred in China, where many sick patients were initially turned away from hospitals, and now is unfolding in Italy, where overwhelmed doctors are withholding ventilators from older, sicker adults so they can go to younger, healthier patients.

Choosing between patients “goes against the way we used to think about our profession, against the way we think about our behavior with patients,” said Dr. Marco Metra, chief of cardiology at a hospital in one of Italy’s hardest-hit regions.

In the United States, some guidelines already exist for this grim task. In an effort little known even among doctors, federal grant programs helped hospitals, states and the Veterans Health Administration develop what are essentially rationing plans for a severe pandemic. Now those plans, some of which may be outdated, are being revisited for the coronavirus outbreak.

But little research has been done to see whether the strategies would save more lives or years of life compared with a random lottery to assign ventilators or critical care beds — an option some support to avoid bias against people with disabilities and others.

Some commonly recommended rationing strategies, researchers found, could paradoxically increase the number of deaths. And protocols involve value judgments as much as medical ones, and have to take into account the public’s trust.

If hospitals withhold treatment by age, where do they draw the line? If they give lower priority to those with certain underlying health conditions, they may in effect be offering black Americans less treatment than white Americans. If physicians try to redirect resources — putting a patient on a ventilator for a few days, then giving it to someone else who appears to have better prospects — more people may die because few would get adequate treatment. And if many patients have a similar chance of survival, what fair way is there to make a choice?

The federal government, so far at least, is not providing national rationing guidelines for the coronavirus outbreak. Officials from various states, medical associations and hospitals are discussing their own plans, potentially resulting in very different decisions on life-and-death matters about which there are deep disagreements, even among medical professionals.

“You have to be really clear about what you are trying to achieve,” said Christina Pagel, a British researcher who studied the problem during the 2009 H1N1 flu pandemic. “Maybe you end up saving more people but at the end you have got a society at war with itself. Some people are going to be told they don’t matter enough.”

‘The Most Good’

Just before the coronavirus outbreak, Dr. Evans, the physician at Bellevue, moved across the country to direct the intensive care unit at the University of Washington Medical Center in Seattle. The city became one of the first areas in the United States to see community spread of the virus.

The hospital is doing whatever it can to prevent the need to ration — what Dr. Evans referred to as “an ethical obligation.” Like other institutions, it is trying to increase supplies, training staff to act in roles that may be outside their usual jobs and postponing elective surgeries to free up space for coronavirus patients. Some cities are racing to construct new hospitals.

Strategies to avoid rationing during the pandemic were published by the National Academy of Medicine. But hospitals across the country vary in their adherence to such steps. At the University of Miami’s flagship hospital, surgeons were told last Monday to cancel elective surgeries, but across the street at Jackson Memorial Hospital, they were “given wide discretion over whether to cancel or proceed,” according to an update sent to physicians.

Dr. Evans is working with health leaders in Washington State to figure out how to implement triage plans. Their goal, she said, would be “doing the most good for the most people and being fair and equitable and transparent in the process.”

But guidance endorsed and distributed by the Washington State Health Department last week suggested that triage teams under crisis conditions should consider transferring patients out of the hospital or to palliative care if their baseline functioning was marked by “loss of reserves in energy, physical ability, cognition and general health.”

The concept of triage stems from Napoleon’s battlefields. The French military leader’s chief surgeon, Baron Dominique Jean Larrey, concluded that medics should attend to the most dangerously wounded first, without regard to rank or distinction. Later, doctors added other criteria to mass casualty triage, including how likely someone was to survive treatment or how long it would take to care for them.

Protocols for rationing critical care and ventilators in a pandemic had their beginning during the anthrax mailings after the Sept. 11 attacks, but have not previously been implemented.

Dr. Frederick M. Burkle Jr., a former Vietnam War physician, laid out ideas for how to handle the victims of a large-scale bioterrorist event. After the SARS outbreak stressed Toronto hospitals in 2003, some of his ideas were proposed by Canadian doctors, and they made their way into many American plans after the H1N1 pandemic in 2009. “I have said to my wife, ‘I think I developed a monster here,’” Dr. Burkle said in an interview.

What worried him was that the protocols often had rigid exclusion criteria for ventilators or even hospital admission. Some used age as a cutoff or pre-existing conditions like advanced cancer, kidney failure or severe neurological impairment. Dr. Burkle, though, had emphasized the importance of reassessing the level of resources sometimes on a daily or hourly basis in an effort to minimize the need to deny care.

Also, the plans might not achieve their goals of maximizing survival. For example, most called for reassigning a ventilator after several days if a patient was not improving, allowing it to be allocated to a different patient.

But rapidly cycling ventilators might not give anyone enough chance to improve. When the coronavirus causes severe pneumonia, doctors are finding that patients require treatment for weeks.

In Canada, a study of H1N1 patients found that 70 percent of those who would have been withdrawn from ventilators after a five-day time trial if a rationing plan had been implemented actually survived with continued care.

Researchers at a British hospital had similar findings, concluding that “a new model of triage needs to be developed.”

A Score Card and a Lottery

Many of the original plans in the U.S. were developed exclusively by medical personnel. But in Seattle, public health officials gathered community input on a possible plan more than a decade ago.

Some citizens feared that using predicted survival to determine access to resources — a common strategy — might be inherently discriminatory, according to a report on the exercise. Citing “institutional racism in the health care system,” they were concerned that the metrics for some groups, like African-Americans and immigrants, would be skewed because they had not received the same quality of care.

There were similar findings in Maryland, where researchers at Johns Hopkins engaged residents across the state in deliberations over several years.

The researchers presented them with several options. Hospitals could assign ventilators on a first-come, first-served basis. Some thought that could disadvantage people who lived far from hospitals. A lottery struck other participants as more fair.

Others argued for a more outcome-oriented approach. One goal could be saving the highest number of lives, regardless of factors like age. A different goal could be saving the most years of life, a strategy favoring younger, healthier patients. Participants also considered whether those playing a valuable role in a pandemic, like medical workers who risked their lives, should be made a priority.

After the project ended, the Hopkins researchers designed a framework that assigns scores to patients based on estimated probability of short- and long-term survival. The latter was defined by whether the person had a pre-existing life expectancy of at least a year. Ventilators would be provided, as available, according to their ranking. The framework recommends a lottery for lifesaving resources when patients have identical scores. Stage of life may also be used as a “tiebreaker.” Decisions should be made by designated triage officers, not individual doctors caring for patients, and there should be a limited appeals process in cases of resource withdrawal, the protocol said.

The public input led the Hopkins researchers not to incorporate most exclusion criteria.

Dr. Lee Daugherty Biddison, one of the effort’s leaders, said that was because most participants were uncomfortable excluding patients with underlying health issues. Preconditions don’t always predict survival from respiratory viruses, and having chronic diseases like diabetes, kidney failure and high blood pressure often tracks with access to medical care. Rationing based on these conditions would be “essentially punishing people for their station in life,” Dr. Biddison said.

The Hopkins group published a description of the framework last year, and doctors from other Maryland hospitals are teleconferencing twice a day to prepare to implement the plan if conditions grow extreme. Dr. Biddison has also been sharing the recommendations with doctors across the country.

In Pennsylvania, Dr. Douglas B. White, chairman of ethics in critical care medicine at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, is using the Hopkins protocol to help prepare hospitals in his state.

In Colorado, Dr. Matthew Wynia, a bioethicist and infectious disease doctor, is working on a plan that would also assign a score. In his rubric, the first considerations are odds of survival and expected length of treatment. He said there was wide agreement among planners “not to make decisions on perceived social worth, race, ethnic background and long-term disability status,” which some fear could happen if doctors had to make seat-of-the-pants judgments without guidelines.

He is also trying to ensure that patients on admission to Colorado hospitals are asked whether they would forgo a ventilator if there were not enough for everyone. “One thing everyone agrees on is that the most morally defensible way to decide would be to ask the patients,” Dr. Wynia said.

He supports the idea of reassigning ventilators in certain cases. “If things are clearly getting worse, it’s really hard to justify a stance of once you’re on a vent, you own it, no matter how many people have to die in the meantime,” Dr. Wynia said.

Unlike in Italy, where age has been used in rationing treatment, some people developing protocols elsewhere have de-emphasized it. “There are arguments about valuing the young over the old that I am personally very uncomfortable with,” Dr. Pagel, the British researcher, said, including that young people should be a higher priority because they have more life ahead of them.

“Where is your threshold? Is a 20-year-old really more valuable than a 50-year-old, or are 50-year-olds actually more useful for your economy, because they have experience and skills that 20-year-olds don’t have?”

A Right to Know

As Hurricane Sandy intensified outside Bellevue in 2012, Dr. Evans referred to New York State guidelines, since updated — which some hospital leaders have said they will follow if overwhelmed by the coronavirus — on how to allocate ventilators in a pandemic using a scoring system that tries to estimate someone’s chance of survival. She pulled together an ad hoc committee of doctors, ethicists and nurses. “Having a system and procedures gave us a sense we had some control of the situation,” she recalled.

For those about to lose electricity, she and her colleagues stationed two staff members at the bedside of all patients who relied on ventilators, preparing to manually squeeze oxygen into their lungs with flexible Ambu bags.

Looking back, Dr. Evans feels the patients and their families had the right to know that their machines would lose power, but in the crisis they hadn’t been told. The doctors also did not think to ask whether any patients or their families might volunteer to give up a power outlet so that it could be provided to someone else. “It wasn’t even on my radar,” Dr. Evans said.

In the end, it was improvisation that prevented tragic rationing at Bellevue. The generator fuel pumps failed, but a chain of volunteers hand-carried diesel up 13 flights of stairs. Dr. Evans’s patients were all maintained on backup power until they were transferred to other hospitals.

“I remember it really vividly,” she said of the experience. “It’s going to stay with me my entire professional career.”

#Hospitals #Doctors #Rationing

2 notes · View notes

simonjadis · 5 years

Text

I’m going to be afk for almost all of this weekend. I’ll have scheduled posts but that’s it. I’ll be reachable on Twitter (simonjadis) of course. I wanted to explain why.

content warnings: family member illness, terminal illness, cancer

My grandmother is one of the most important people in my life. During my childhood, I always lived close to her -- when I was preschool age, my mom and I even lived with her for a year during my mother’s divorce.

She was born on a farm in what was then rural North Carolina in 1930. How rural? The doctor made a house call and, instead of charging money for her delivery, instead asked for a calf “he’d had his eye on” as payment.

She and my grandfather, Herb Harward, had five children and eight grandchildren. Grandaddy passed away in 2007, but Grandmama now has a total of 4 great-grandchildren. She is 89.

There’s so much that I could write about her. I’ve known her all my life, but since my aunt passed away in 2014 (and she was living alone for the first time in her life), I’ve called and spoken to her every day. We’ve always had an incredibly close bond.

I got my sense of smell from her, but not her sense of hearing. My grandfather used to compliment her on both, saying: “If she could only run, she’d make a hell of a dog.”

If you’ve ever watched The Closer, know that Brenda Lee Johnson’s parents on that show are so eerily similar to my grandmother and grandfather and their dynamic that if it turned out that they were somehow based on them, I would not be surprised. Even the character’s names sound like someone tried to slightly tweak the real names. It doesn’t help that they named their firstborn “Brenda.”

In 2011, when Chaz Bono appeared on Dancing With The Stars, Grandmama (who loved that show) expressed her disgust over the awful backlash that he received for being transgender. I wouldn’t really call Grandmama “woke” by any means, but she couldn’t imagine why people would give him a hard time for being himself, “because that’s nobody’s business!”

She did, on a number of occasions over the years, accidentally say “transcendent” instead of transgender. No complaints here.

Grandmama was a Republican -- decidedly past tense. In 2012, she confided to my mother that she had voted for Obama. To put that in context, she was raised in a family so Baptist that she had to sneak around in order to go dancing with other teens in the ‘40s.

In 2014, my Grandmother took that even further, voting almost straight-ticket for Democrats. My mom and I took her to her polling station.

Here is grandmama in 2015. The photo to the left shows her wearing a pair of (my) slippers, which are a little too large for her. The photo to the right shows her either wearing my snuggie or donning her Mythic Dawn garb to go assassinate Uriel Septim VII. Either way, adorbs.

In 2016, everything about Trump chilled her to her bones. She was so excited to vote for Hillary, and that’s just what she did. Like most people in the country, she was mortified by the election’s results. She and I discussed politics, history, and the news constantly. We both used our sense of humor to cope with the nightmare that the world has become.

I don’t know whom she might support in the Primaries, though I will say that she has more than once brought up liking “that woman with a plan for everything.” I like Elizabeth Warren, too.

Unfortunately, during the first half of July of this year, Grandmama learned that she had thyroid cancer. She’s had strokes, heart attacks, open heart surgery, and is a breast cancer survivor.

This time looks different.

On Monday, my mother called me in the morning to let me know that she’d finally learned the diagnosis -- Grandmama didn’t want anyone to know at first. Even I, who spoke to her every day, didn’t get a direct answer for weeks. There are no good cancers to get, but anaplstic thyroid cancer is one of the worst. It appears that it has already spread beyond control.

There was a plan that she would receive immunotherapy (which looked promising in preliminary tests) and targeted radiation therapy. These were intended to improve her quality of life by preventing the tumor from cutting off her airway.

Today, Friday, my mom called to let me know that the hospital has determined that the radiation would be more likely to simply kill my grandmother than help. She’s not sure if Grandmama will be going back home or not. The plan was for me to visit next weekend, but it’s not clear if that is still viable or not.

So I’m heading out to see her this weekend. I am ... devastated.

#personal #cw cancer #long post

14 notes · View notes

theliberaltony · 4 years

Link

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Welcome to your first FiveThirtyEight Election Update of the 2020 primary cycle! This is a column in which we’ll talk about the primary race through the lens of our forecast model, which we released earlier this week. Sometimes it will be rather brief, and quickly run through the latest data — while other times, we’ll go into a deep-dive on upcoming states or some aspect of how the model works.

We don’t necessarily plan to publish an Election Update as a result of each single new poll, but Friday’s Selzer & Co. poll of the Iowa caucus, published by the Des Moines Register and CNN, warrants an exception and did have a somewhat material effect on the model.

Why is it worth focusing on this one individual poll — something that we’d usually advise against?

Selzer & Co. is a very good pollster, one of the best in the business.

There haven’t been a lot of polls of Iowa recently.

Iowa is pretty darn important, at least in terms of how our model thinks about the race, with the potential to produce fairly large bounces that will affect the rest of the calendar.

The poll showed Bernie Sanders ahead with 20 percent of the vote, followed by Elizabeth Warren at 17 percent, Pete Buttigieg at 16 percent and Joe Biden at 15 percent. This is a reasonably big shift from the previous Selzer & Co. poll, in November, which had shown Buttigieg ahead with 25 percent of the vote. (Although, for reasons I’ll get to in a moment, the model views the latest poll as more neutral than negative for Buttigieg.) Amy Klobuchar was next in the poll at 6 percent, but that was unchanged from November despite a couple of debate performances since November that voters rated strongly in our polling with Ipsos. Andrew Yang was sixth at 5 percent.

So then, how did the new poll affect our model? Here’s what our current national numbers look like:

Biden remains the most likely candidate to get a delegate majority, with a 38 percent chance, followed by Sanders at 24 percent, Warren at 13 percent, and Buttigieg at 10 percent. There’s also a 14 percent chance that no one wins a majority, which could potentially lead to a contested convention.

But those numbers do represent an improvement for Sanders and Warren and a decline for Biden. Here’s a before-and-after comparison:

How a new Iowa poll affected our numbers

Candidates’ before-and-after chances of winning a majority of pledged delegates following the Selzer & Co. Iowa Poll on Jan. 10, according to FiveThirtyEight’s primary forecast

Candidate Last model run before Selzer & Co. poll Current forecast Biden 41% 38% Sanders 22 24 Warren 11 13 Buttigieg 10 10 No majority 14 14

Current forecast as of Jan. 11 at 12 p.m. ET

Biden’s majority chances fell by 3 percentage points, from 41 percent to 38 percent, while Sanders’s and Warren’s each gained 2 percentage points. Buttigieg’s chances were unchanged.

I really like having a model at times like this because it allows for a fairly rigorous and objective answer to the question of: How much should I update my priors as a result of this new piece of information? If you’re just winging it, it’s super easy to screw that up in either direction, either dismissing new data as being “an outlier,” etc. — or claiming that the new data has massively inverted the trajectory of the race when it probably hasn’t. (The latter is usually the more common mistake in media coverage of the campaigns since it makes for more dramatic headlines.)

In FiveThirtyEight model terms, swings of this magnitude — Biden falling from 41 percent to 38 percent — are a relatively big deal. They will likely be on the high end of the shifts you see as a result of a single state poll, with the possible exception of final polls conducted on the eve of a primary or caucus. (Let me back up and caveat that: I think that this will be on the high end of poll-induced swings based on what we’ve seen in our past general-election models, but since the primary model is a new product for us, I’m not quite sure.)

At the same time, if this poll has completely upended your view of the race, then — I’m trying to put this constructively — you need to go back and add a little more rigor to your mental model of the primaries. Iowa still has four highly plausible winners; that was true both before and after the poll. Our model has Sanders (with a 29 percent chance) and Biden (also with a 29 percent chance) as being a bit more likely than the others to win, but it’s not really much of an edge (we have Buttigieg’s chances at 22 percent, and Warren’s at 16 percent). Perhaps the candidate who had the most reason to be disappointed by the new poll was Klobuchar. Making a very late surge to win Iowa is not completely out of the question — Rick Santorum did it in 2012 — but we have her chances down to 2 percent.

Biden remains the most likely overall winner of the delegate race, meanwhile, with Sanders in the next-best position. That’s because Biden, leading in national polls, would be awfully hard to catch if he won Iowa. For the other three candidates, there would be the question of whether the Iowa bounce would be enough to propel them past Biden, with Sanders being in the best position to do so because he’s second in national polls and because his polling is also relatively strong in both New Hampshire and Nevada.

It’s also worth keeping in mind that we do have some other recent information about Iowa apart from this poll. A YouGov poll of Iowa released last weekend showed a three-way tie between Biden, Sanders and Buttigieg. And our model also makes inferences about candidates’ standing in Iowa based on trends in national polls. That’s the reason the model didn’t have Buttigieg’s chances falling as a result of this poll; it had already anticipated that his numbers would decline as a result of his slump in national polls. Conversely, even though the numbers didn’t seem that terrific for Warren on the surface — her 17 percent in the new Selzer & Co. poll is only a 1-point improvement from her 16 percent in November — it comes during a period when she’d been declining in national polls. So it’s a bullish sign for her campaign that she’s still one of the front-runners in Iowa.

By the way, “one of the front-runners” is about as precise as it’s possible to realistically be in Iowa. Our forecast will get a bit more accurate as more polls come in and as the Feb. 3 caucuses approach,. but the model assumes that caucuses are awfully hard to poll, which means there are high margins of error.

That’s especially so in Iowa given some of the quirks of the caucus process, the most important of which is that in each precinct, voters for candidates who don’t have at least 15 percent of the vote must “realign” themselves to candidates who do. Iowa will also release three different ways of counting its vote. More about that stuff in future Election Updates. And although I’m not going to get into it today, some of the data from the poll that the model doesn’t use — like favorability ratings and second-choice preferences and how many voters have firmly decided on a candidate (not many, although Sanders supporters are something of an exception) — should contribute to the sense that the race is open-ended.

All of that is a long-winded way of saying there’s a lot of ambiguity about what will happen in Iowa. Through that fog, our model picked up some good news for Sanders and Warren and some bad news for Biden in this poll. But the fog is pretty dense.

#IFTTT #Politics – FiveThirtyEight #politics #538 #Nate Silver

2 notes · View notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 5 years

Text

EU Commission Decides To Mock The Public; Insists Fears About EU Copyright Directive Are All Myths

On Thursday, the European Commission posted -- on its official Medium page -- an astoundingly juvenile and obnoxious post, lashing out at those who have complained that Articles 11 and 13 in the EU Copyright Directive will be destructive. The post was snide and condescending, and suggested that most of the opposition was fake and "astroturfed" and that anyone who really believed that the EU Copyright Directive was a problem was brainwashed by Google and Facebook. It was... quite a post. On Friday evening, I wrote up a (mostly) line-by-line response to its utter nonsense and planned to post it this week once people were back in the office to review it. However, on Saturday, after widespread criticism, the EU Commission "removed" the post without an apology -- but with the standard cop out of someone who did something bad but can't admit it:

We have removed this article as it has been understood in a way that doesn’t reflect the Commission’s position.

"... it has been understood..." Not "we wrote an insulting, misleading and condescending article that we shouldn't have posted." Not, "we're sorry that we lashed out at the public we're supposed to represent." No, it's all your fault in that you "misunderstood" our obnoxious, snide remarks to be both obnoxious and snide.

Given that so many people missed it and that I already had this post written with much of the original quoted -- what follows is my original post.

This is quite incredible. Earlier this year, we wrote about the Legislative Affairs Committee of the EU Parliament putting out a "Q and A" page about the EU Copyright Directive that was so full of wrong that it was insulting. However, now it appears that the EU Commission has decided to one up its colleagues in the Parliament by posting an article to Medium of all places (one of the many sites that will be massively harmed by the Directive) insisting that you're all fools for thinking that anything bad might happen, and that it's all the fault of Google/Facebook. Thankfully, for at least the time being, I am free to quote large parts of their article and respond to it without having to "buy a license" from the Commission, so let's take advantage of that remaining bit of freedom.

Take this test: Type in ‘EU Copyright Directive’ into the search box in Youtube. The majority of results in the top 20 will be passionately against it. Here’s some of the headlines, if you’re not sure:

‘Shocking update on the Copyright Directive.’ ‘Today Europe lost the Internet’ ‘How the new copyright laws will destroy the internet’ ‘Censorship machines’, ‘EU to end the internet’ or ‘Europe to ban all memes’

Of course, we know from recent elections and referendums that simple memorable slogans — however untrue or unobtainable — can go a long way to winning over hearts, minds and voters. And so it was, that the wholly inaccurate phrases ‘ link taxes ’ and ‘ censorship machines ’ started to be part of the campaign against the proposed Copyright Directive. Never let the truth get in the way of a catchy slogan.

Note the opening here is dripping with condescension, suggesting that even though basically everyone is not only against this law, but speaking out against it, they're all just silly fools, tricked by a slogan. Note that this does not respond to any of the massive problems many, many experts have raised about the approach in the Copyright Directive -- especially on Articles 11 and 13. It just sneers about what it says are inaccurate phrases (spoiler alert: those phrases are not inaccurate).

The idea behind the Directive is to bring copyright rules into the 21st century. The current rules are very analogue and designed for the world before the web. Things have changed. Search and social media platforms largely define the way we enjoy content today, but their market dominance has now tilted the balance in their favour and away from those who design and create original things.

This is hogwash. The "laws" they are trying to change include things like the EU's E-Commerce Directive that was (oh, look at that) passed in the 21st Century, when the web was already around and thriving. Second, the idea that search and social media platforms have "tilted the balance... away from those who design and create original things" is ludicrous. As we've shown for years, the internet has given a massive boost to content creation -- enabling more creation in nearly every single category. It has made it easier to create, produce, release, distribute, share, build a fan base and to make money than at any time in history. The internet has enabled more people than ever before in history to not just create, but to make money from their creations.

If you want to know who it's tilted the playing field against, it's the legacy gatekeepers: the old record labels, movie studios and publishers, who used to operate in an oligopolistic world, with little competition, where they could demand all of the rights from creators in exchange for a small chance of success -- and if success came, those gatekeepers would still suck up nearly all of the rewards. Can anyone tell me if Return of the Jedi is profitable yet? Has Lyle Lovett's record label paid him a dime yet? Meanwhile, artists who are embracing the internet are finding that it can pay off massively.

The world of Article 11 and 13 is a move towards going back to the old system. To force artists and creators into the arms of a small group of gatekeepers who decide if you can even post your content online at all, let alone try to make money from it. For the EU Commission to repeat a completely made up myth that artists are somehow worse off today is not just revisionist history bullshit, it's insulting.

As it stands, big internet platforms such as Facebook or Google make a lot of money from ads that appear on their sites alongside copyrighted material such as music or clips. The more people view, the more money platforms can earn from those adverts.

Very little of the content appearing on Facebook and Google is infringing. Yes, both sites will send a lot of traffic to content elsewhere, and make money on ads from that service, but that's different. Meanwhile, both Google and Facebook have spent many millions of dollars on automated filters to block out infringing content (or to allow copyright holders to monetize that content). So if the idea is to attack those companies with a new law requiring such filters, how does this law "improve" anything?

Answer: it does not. The new law is designed to ramp up the liability even higher -- such that when such filters fail (and they always fail because it is impossible to get right), the fines will be catastrophic. As such, the entire point of Articles 11 and 13 is to be so ridiculous and so draconian, that Google and Facebook would have no choice but to pay up to avoid getting hit with tons of lawsuits. It's an extortionate plan, put together by the EU bureaucrats, to favor legacy gatekeepers.

Just as Google and Facebook are being rewarded financially for all their hard work in producing amazing software, clever algorithms and exciting designs, we think authors, film-makers, journalists and musicians should also be rewarded for their endeavours too. At the moment the balance of power in who gets paid for such royalties resides overwhelmingly with the big Californian companies — who are worth around $1 Trillion.

This implies -- totally falsely -- that "authors, film makers, journalists and musicians" are not being rewarded today for their endeavors. They are. Some successfully. Some unsuccessfully. Demanding that EVERY INTERNET COMPANY that hosts content (not just Google and Facebook) cough up massive sums of money to gatekeepers (who have a history of not paying actual creators) doesn't seem like a smart path forward. It sounds like an utterly corrupt one.

The Copyright Directive is an attempt to create a level playing field where everyone can gain from the amazing options that the new technologies offer. Musicians, artists, video producers and the whole creative sector will benefit by having a fairer negotiating position.

"Everyone can gain"? By making platforms no longer work? By making it impossible to post and share content? By forcing small companies out of business? By killing off the ways in which many independent creators now earn their livings? The EU Commission is so bizarrely disconnected from reality.

Journalists and online publications will have more money to keep on financing quality research and news. Despite what you might read, the Copyright directive supports a free press and could enable journalists to get some money when their articles are shared online. Good journalism costs money and without a free press there is no democracy.

Remember, Article 11 has already been tried in both Germany and Spain, and failed in both places. It did not lead to more money for journalists or publications. It did not help support a free press. It actually harmed a free press. How the EU Commission can just push out blatant lies without people laughing at them is beyond me.

Fair remuneration for and from the platforms and a fairer market place is what we want. We cannot achieve a real European digital single market which makes us all better off, if copyrighted material is misused or poorly remunerated. Because if creative people don’t get paid, they can’t afford to be creative. No Mon = No Fun

Define "fair"? Is it "fair" that Return of the Jedi never made a profit and people who were supposed to share in its profits never did so? Is it fair that Lyle Lovett never received any royalties? It does seem fair that artists who build up a strong fan base, like Amanda Palmer, are able to earn a really nice living supported by her fans. It will be too bad when the platforms that helped her do so -- like Patreon and Kickstarter -- find that they are unworkable under Article 13. That seems... unfair. And again, right now more artists than ever before are getting paid. And that's happening because of the internet that Article 13 will fundamentally change.

And, uh, "no mon = no fun"? Isn't this the same damn post where the EU Commission itself was mocking "slogans"? But let's be clear here: there is currently both more "mon" and more "fun" based on literally every single study of the market place today. The internet has enabled wild creativity -- but also tremendous remuneration. The real problem that the EU Commission has is that this is now being spread around much further, and the old gatekeepers with their strong lobbying relationships aren't able to capture as much of it.

The EU Copyright Directive is corrupt cronyism at its worst.

Just like everyone else, the EU loves culture, cinema, art and music. We have no intention in restricting young people’s access to all these wonderful things on- or offline. Oh and by the way, no matter what some people (and paid-for campaigns) may tell you, you will never be prevented from having a laugh online. WE ARE NOT BANNING MEMES. On the contrary, there will be a guarantee that platforms respect your right to self-expression. That includes pastiche, critique and parody.

They keep saying this and it is nonsense. They demand filters -- and then say that platforms will have to "nerd harder" to figure out how not to use those filters to block memes. What they ignore (purposefully, because this has been explained in great detail) is that no filter can understand the context to recognize what is a "meme" or what is parody. Indeed, popular memes have been at the center of multiple copyright cases.

Nonetheless, it appears as if the largest search and video platforms in the world are afraid of regulation — despite having overwhelming dominance on the internet.

This might be the only accurate statement in this whole damn article. They may very well be afraid of regulation. And maybe for good reasons -- because such regulation will massively and fundamentally change the very nature of the internet -- not just for themselves, but for everyone else as well. That's the concern.

Furthermore, there is ample evidence from respected sources, here and here and perhaps here or here or indeed here that ‘Big Technology’ has even ‘created’ grassroots campaigns against the Copyright Directive in order to make it look and sound as if the EU is acting against the ‘will of the people’.

This is the absolute most disgusting part of this. In one paragraph -- much of it linking to a group of people known for (a) being paid by competitors to Google or (b) conspiracy-theory levels of insanity regarding the internet -- the European Commission simply brushes away millions of citizens and their views. While it's entirely possible that the big internet companies are pushing their viewpoint here, the above paragraph is overly inflated nonsense. The public is going crazy about this, in large part because of nonsense like this that is being put out, where it is clear that the bureaucrats in Brussels don't know (a) how the internet works, (b) what this law will actually do, or (c) what the public is actually saying.

Over at Change.org there's a petition protesting this with nearly 5 million signatures, making it the largest petition in Change.org's entire history. You don't fake that. People are angry. And with good reason, when the bureaucrats, who are supposed to represent their interests, are spewing utter nonsense along these lines.

And the most incredible part? Right after totally dismissing the views of the vast majority of the public, these numbskulls state the following:

That’s another myth. Unlike Google and Facebook, the EU is answerable to the public and to democratically elected politicians.

Answerable to the public? You just pretended the views of the public weren't legitimate. You ignored the largest petition in history. You are not representing the interests of the public, but rather a very small legacy industry which failed to adapt. The whole thing is completely disgusting.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190215/18005841607/eu-commission-decides-to-mock-public-insists-fears-about-eu-copyright-directive-are-all-myths.shtml

25 notes · View notes

rebelwheelssoapbox · 5 years

Text

Why Is Governor Cuomo Attacking Disabled New Yorkers Like Me? (And What You Can Do About It)

In 2018, my body developed Dysphagia (a condition where easily swallowing food and water, is not really an option.) Meanwhile, my brain, apparently feeling like the first one needed a friend, grew a second brain cyst. As a result, I became mostly bed bound and spent a good portion of my summer in a hospital and then eventually in a rehab/nursing home.

When I was in these environments, I only got worse. Both places struggled to accommodate my particular dietary needs (in fact I lost even more weight while there), they had absolutely zero training in regard to processing disorders (as my brain is on the spectrum), and refused to let me use my motorized wheelchair with spine support (which my spine needs), forcing me to either stay in bed all day or attempt to use their manual wheelchair which was harmful to my spine (as it lacked the spine support that it requires), and was utterly exhausting to my muscles. It was to the point where several times, I went from mostly bed bound to totally bed bound. Furthermore, in the 3 weeks that I was in the nursing home, I received a total of two showers. Sometimes I got a partial “sponge bath” where they hastily “washed” maybe (at best) 1/5th of your body, but never washed the soap off which really irritated your skin. Thankfully, I transitioned from the nursing home to my apartment, as I knew that with proper services, I could live in my home and in my chosen community. That's when I started to apply for medicaid and specifically CDPA, a program that would allow me to choose who I hire and work with as my PCA (or personal care attendant).

[a photo of myself in my hospital bed, post voting on Election Day. It wore me out, but with the assistance of my CDPA PCA, I was able to do it. Image of a disabled woman with spastic arms holding up a “I Voted” sticker, as she lays on her hospital bed with purple sheets. She is wearing headphones to reduce the noise.] The word in the disability community was that CDPA was the way to go, and it makes sense. After all, if you must rely on people to feed and bathe you, wouldn't you want a say in who does that? Wouldn't you feel safer interviewing the candidates beforehand and having a voice in who is allowed into your home? Having input as to who is in charge of your health? With traditional services, you do not have a say in any of this. I know this because at one point, while in the process of setting up CDPA, due to bureaucratic hoopla, I was somewhat forced into traditional services (it was either that or have them close my case and re-apply for Medicaid all over again - which was not much of an option as the process takes so long as it is).

[a photo of myself as The Woman’s March before the setback. I am wearing a cat hat and a holding a protest sign that reads “Disabled People Don’t Want Your Pity. We Just Want Out Rights.”] In addition to basically having to let total strangers into my home, all the PCAs that the agency sent to me, were not fluent in English, to the point where I could not communicate my needs (and they could not communicate theirs). I once asked if I could please have a popsicle. I was brought an apple. I said “no, no, it's in the freezer.” but as much as this person tried, they did not know the word. But it went beyond that. Because the PCAs and I could not fully communicate with each other, they didn't understand that they needed to clean the humidifier daily (which was essential as it kept the dysphagia at bay, and helped me with my breathing). As a result, not only did they partially damage the humidifier (due to a lack of cleaning), but my dysphagia got worse. At one point, I actually started to choke on my food, but because of the communication barrier, the weekend PCA did not understand what was happening. And cognitive exercises? Something I need on a daily basis (as I am prone to cognitive down slide) - that just was not happening. In fact, similar to when I was at the nursing home/hospital, the people did not understand neurodivergency, and cognitively I only got worse. But probably one of the most harrowing experiences, was when a friend of mine was over and I decided now was a good time to try a shower with the weekday PCA, who at this point, I did not totally feel safe with. How can I communicate my rules about consent if there was a language barrier between us? How could I feel safe when she would sometimes think it was funny when my speech impediment was in effect (as if it impacted my credibility. It does not.) On top of that, with my processing disorder, where I can not process information in real time, I could not always process what was happening to me and communicate my needs in real time. But it had been weeks since I had a shower, (unlike when I have CDPA, where showers and proper sponge baths happen on a regular basis) and I figured with my friend here, she could help advocate if necessary. And thank god, she was there! There I was in the shower, and the PCA was scrubbing my skin so harshly, that it was physically painful. It was so overwhelming on a sensory level and traumatic! Even my friend, seeing what was happening said “Why are you being so rough with her?!” and told her to be more gentle, but she didn't understand nor stop. I cried so hard when it was done and refused to shower till I was able to transition back to CDPA.

[original artwork that I made at the time. I felt so frustrated and powerless - especially since I knew if I could get back on CDPA, it wouldn’t be like this. original artwork showing an angry face ] But (in my experience) that is traditional services. I can try to request another person, but they sent me three people within a short period of time, and while some were nicer than others, this was pretty much the standard. With CDPA, I am in charge of the hiring process. I can hire someone based on their experience and compatibility. I can ask about what are their views on disability and not hire someone who is condescending and/or rough with me. With CDPA you can even hire a family member or friend, who understands your needs but won’t go bankrupt in the process of caring for you, because they will get paid to do so. With traditional services, I have no say who I get. With traditional services, they don't send you someone based on your needs. They send you a person – anyone who is available to cover that shift. Thankfully, after the people that I hired were fully registered, I was able to transition back to CDPA. I now have two lovely PCAs who have experience with people with processing disorders, who are creative and work with me to do cognitive exercises. And because in NYC, they are paid more than the traditional service PCAs, they are happier and put more effort into their work. As a result, I feel safe again. I can relax again. I can go back to focusing on getting stronger, and doing things that bring me joy, so I can improve my standard of living, so I can lead a full and fulfilling life. In my experience, I would not be able to do that with traditional services, where my energy was put towards just barely getting by.

[a photo of myself laying in my hospital bed with purple sheets. I am wearing a narwhal adult onesie, and reading “Howl” by Allen Ginsberg.] So you might imagine the near panic and heartbreak that I felt when I read that “ Governor Cuomo is looking to end the Consumer Directed Personal Assistance (CDPA) program as we know it today. Worse yet, his attacks on the program go so far as putting the entire fate of the program in the hands of Washington, now going on a month of their shutdown.“ After taking a deep breath, I asked Gregg Beratan from CDRNYS what exactly are the details of this change, and what can the people can do about it: “Long story short: This budget will repeal the law that made CDPA and replace it with a stripped down version that eliminates 9 out of every 10 FIs [fiscal intermediaries] in the state. The ultimate goal is to move to ONE FI for all of New York. So if the agency is one of the 10% that survives initially, they will not be around long." This is a total nightmare. One of the many benefits of CDPA, is that you have the option to shop around and get the best living wage (as different FI’s or fiscal intermediaries offer varying wages) for the people you hire. Having the ability to offer a proper wage, isn’t just a matter of worker solidarity (though that is most definitely part of it.) It is far easier to keep a good worker when they can financially support themselves on the pay they are given. A low wage means more employee turn over and more disgruntled workers, which increases the risk of abuse. Gregg went on to explain that if things move forward as Cuomo plans, and “If your FI opened its doors after January 1, 2012 or is not an independent living center it will be out of business immediately.” The FI that I have chosen fits into this category! Does Cuomo not understand how CDPA works? Does he not care about disabled New Yorkers & the people that work for them? “If the federal government does not approve the new version of this law, there will be no CDPA at all. Even if the program gets through Washington, in an unprecedented move, the new law gives the Commissioner of Health absolute power in determining it's continued existence. The benefit could stop immediately at any time if they do not think the reimbursement they are getting is "adequate." Jesus Christ!

[These attacks on my community is so draining! original artwork showing a sad face] Alright, this is not over yet. We can take action (and please - in the name of decency and solidarity, take action) TAKE ACTION: “First - Call Governor Cuomo at 518-474-8390. Tell him "Consumer directed personal assistance lets me live my life, on my terms, in my community. Your changes would send me to a nursing home. End your attack on seniors and the disabled today! Stop attacking CDPA." (Or if you’re not disabled, tell him "Consumer directed personal assistance lets disabled people live their life, on their terms, in their community. Your changes would send them to a nursing home. End your attack on seniors and the disabled today! Stop attacking CDPA." etc. ) If you are unable to make a phone call, you can use Resist Bot. TXT the word RESIST to 50409 & follow directions. Resist Bot will send the message to your politician(s) of choice. “Second - [if you are able] Get ready for a trip to Albany! February 11 is our Legislative Day in Albany. Meet us at 10:00 in the Well of the Legislative Office Building. Apply for a scholarship and we may be able to help with some or all of your travel. “ Third - Contact your Representatives. YOU elected them. YOU need to make sure they are here to fight for you. They care about your stories and your experiences. That is in fact what will let us win.” So, there it is. Whether you are disabled or not, please take a moment to contact Cuomo and tell him Hands Off The CDPA! Because in these times, no oppressed group (such as the disability community) should be left behind.

#CDPA #cuomo #NYS #NYC #medicaid #PCAs #disability #disabled #disabled af #resist #disability rights #nursing homes #PCA #community living #activism #governor cuomo #andrew cuomo #help #take action

3 notes · View notes

jessefferguson · 6 years

Text

My Double Life: 5 Years And Going

It’s been a LONG TIME since I wrote one of these, so I figured now was as good a point as any.

Words, spoken out loud, are funny. They can mean very different things.

Try this one:

I am still here.

and

I am still here.

Both of those are the best summary I can think of for how I feel today since today, May 21, is the 5th anniversary of when I was diagnosed with cancer. Five years ago, I sat in a sweltering doctors office in Washington, D.C. as he told me the results of my first biopsy. Five years later, I still have it.

After 5 years, I have two conflicting emotions: I’m still here (thank God) and I’m still (only) here. Five years later, not much has really changed but, also, everything has.

Over the 5 years, I’ve sort of lived a double life – that of a cancer patient and that of a political operative. Sometimes they overlap but, more often than not, they’re separate worlds.

By my best count, over the 5 years, I’ve had 4 surgeries, 33 days of radiation, upwards of 60 rounds of either chemotherapy or targeted therapy, about 75 blood tests, and 150 doctors’ appointments. And over the same 5 years, I’ve worked on 191 television ads, 311 polls, thousands of press releases and speeches, spent over $100 million (of other people’s money), and sent over 40,000 of my own tweets.

I continue to believe the same thing I did – and wrote about - 5 years ago, there are three keys to getting through this sort of thing: (1) Your family and friends; (2) Doctors who are the best; (3) Doing something with your time that you love to do. Even on the worst days of work, the fact that I was doing the work I wanted to do made it that much more possible to fight a disease I did not want to deal with.

WHAT’S THE LATEST WITH ME

I’m living and working from Brooklyn, still. I decided to stay here after the Clinton campaign ended rather than move back to D.C. for a bunch of reasons – closer to my doctors at Sloan Kettering and further from Trump at the WH. Both sounded like good ideas.

For just under a year, I’ve been on a clinical trail and it’s getting some pretty good results. It’s a targeted therapy drug and I’m one of the first to apply it to my unique disease. It’s unlikely to result in me being “cured” or “cancer free” but it’s definitely shrunk the disease in my skin tissue and throughout my head, neck and chest. It’s also brought down the swelling. The swelling issues are far from gone, but they’re better. The best case is that it continues shrinking things; the next best case is it stops anything from getting worse again. Either way, it’s turned my condition to a chronic one, for now. I’ll take it.

Every three weeks I do the same routine. I book a someone to come clean my house for that morning and I take a car down to Sloan Kettering. I take a blood test. The doctor and I talk about medical stuff for a few minutes and politics for a few minutes and then he sends me for treatment. He’s not from America and has a healthy interest in all the crazy things in our politics.

It takes them about 2 hours to prepare the drug, so I have found a corner in the hospital that is usually empty for work — open the laptop, put on the head set and get to work. It’s my own cancer-center-based mobile-office. I have edited TV scripts and polls, held conference calls, did a radio interview and even convinced a donor to contribute – all from a table in a hospital waiting room. Last week’s discussion was about the placement of a media buy. It’s amazing what you can pull of when people don’t really know where you are.

The drug I’m on is an easy one – targeted therapy. It’s like a smart bomb of chemo that only goes to the cells that have the disease. The worst part is the IV, which I barely notice anymore and after 30 minutes, I’m out. On the road home to a clean house with the mild side effect of an uneasy stomach for a few days. Compared to the other drugs I’ve been on, this is like a piece of cake took a walk in a park.

How long will I stay on it? No clue. But it has made this condition chronic. If you offered me a deal today — get this treatment every 3 weeks for 30 minutes and the disease stays under control, I’d sign in a minute. I’d sign it for the next 10 years. For now, I’ll stay on it unless or until it stops working – then I’ll try something else.

WHAT HAPPENED SINCE 2016

As you may remember from my last blog post, just before election 2016, I had spent the previous 6 months working while dealing with the return of my disease.

On election night 2016, I did venture out. It wasn’t something I did often but I wanted to be with the team that night at the Javits Center in Manhattan. I could, now, try to pretend that I had doubts about the outcome of that night to try to make myself look extra smart, but that would be bullshit. I didn’t; I thought we’d win.

The beginning of that afternoon and evening were great. We were monitoring voting and doing the work we needed to do and I was also seeing some good friends who I had been away from while I worked the last few months from home.

Then, the results started and the mood changed. My heart started to sink, but I kept hoping. Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and others poured in. We knew we needed to hold Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania to make it work.

While we waited for those results, I got up to go to the bathroom. As I stood at the urinal, a friend who had better sense for numbers and data than I do, approached the stall next to me. We looked at each other with the same forlorn look of despair as if our confidence was waning. He said “I just looked at the latest data from Michigan; it’s gone.” And with that, I found out we had lost in a way befitting the occasion -- standing at a urinal.

Whether you believe we lost because of a mission from Russia or a miss in Michigan, or any other reason, one thing was clear: we lost the electoral college. It was over. And while I stared at my peers and colleagues – friends who had hired me and friends who I had hired – I couldn’t stop thinking, “What’s next?”

Despite what you might see or hear, the group who I worked with on that campaign were some of the smartest, most talented and most committed people I’ve ever had the privilege to work with. As I stared at all of them, I wonder what was next for them. As I thought about it more, I worried what was next for me.

At one point, I wandered away and ended up sitting in the middle of the massive loading dock in the Javits Center with 4 senior staff from the campaign. There where shipping boxes, fork lifts, and one table with a few plastic chairs in the middle. We all just kind of stared at each other. Someone would say something about what we should do or what we should say and we’d all agree but, for the life of me, I couldn’t tell you today what anyone said.

As the night ended, I was one of the last ones to leave. I’m not really sure why, I just couldn’t. I kept finding someone else to talk to. I was trying to be a bit of team cheerleader – as best as was possible at that moment.

At around 4:30am that night, I left the Javits center along side two reporters I had gotten to know. We walked for a bit and then they got into cabs and drove off. I just started walking. And walking. I was thinking about what had happened and what it meant for the country. And, if I’m honest, what it meant for me. I had cancer and had just devoted two years of my life to trying to win the presidency – and had failed. I just kept thinking, maybe even crying a bit, and walking.

When I looked up, it was 6 am and the sun was rising. I had walked from the Javits Center at 36th street down almost to the World Trade Center. Much like I did while wandering around the streets of Washington on May 21, 2013, I had done lots of thinking. But now it was November 9, 2016, and it was time to go back to work. I took a cab home, slept for a few hours, and opened my laptop.

WHAT HAVE I BEEN DOING SINCE

Since the campaign ended in 2016, I’ve been “consulting.” I’m still not sure what “consulting” means but it’s what I’m doing. I’m working on my own for a variety of political projects on a variety of important issues, trying to lend my experience to things where I think I can do something interesting and make a difference in the insane moment we’re in right now.

My work has ranged from the fight over the tax plan and some new digital campaign innovations, to a new polling project and an advertising campaign and others. It’s all kept me busy and kept my mind going – in the fight and doing what I love to do. The work is good cause it’s meaningful, it’s the work I want to be doing, and the variety of projects appeals to my attention-span-of-a-fruit-fly-nature.

It’s also allowed me to speak up a bit more about what I think, which has been quite a change. For the last 15+ years, I’ve always represented someone else – the DCCC Chairman, Secretary Clinton, etc. Now I’m speaking more and writing more in my own voice.

I still feel somewhat like a hermit. I live and work in my Brooklyn apartment. I get out more now than I used to, but, nothing like I did when I was healthy. When you’ve been dealing with this as long as I have, you start to lose track of what looking, feeling and being normal would be like. I get to the deli almost every morning and they know to make my eggs and have my iced coffee ready. Others around know me too. Life is easy and that’s important for me right now. One of these days, I’ll be up for making it harder again – but not yet.

THE HEALTH CARE ISSUE

The first project I took on was to help some friends with the coalition fighting the Obamacare repeal legislation. It’s been a hard-waged battle over the last 16 months to improve health care for people instead of letting it get dismantled.

But it’s also been the first time my double lives overlapped a bit. When the Affordable Care Act passed Congress, I was at my office near capitol hill, celebrating with everyone else. But it didn’t really mean anything to me. It was a good thing, but it wasn’t personal.

Seven years later, when repeal of it failed – repeal that would undercut protections for people with pre-existing conditions like I have – it was a very different moment. In fact, when the first repeal plan was pulled from the House floor, I was actually sitting at Sloan Kettering getting my chemo. I was on the phone talking with someone working with me while in the hospital room getting treated as a news alert came across my computer screen.

I don’t often invoke my own personal health care situation while working on the issue because it shouldn’t be about me. I’m fortunate and would be able to get the care I needed if I had to. But sitting there at age 37, with an IV bag dripping a toxic chemical designed to keep me alive into my arm, I certainly had a different perspective than I had 8 years earlier as an otherwise-healthy, overweight 29 year old who saw passage of the ACA as a good reason to go to the bar and celebrate.

FIVE YEARS AND COUNTING

Once and a while I think about what I could be doing if I was fully healthy. I get sad. Maybe I get mad. As I approach 38 years old at the end of this year, more and more of my friends are having their first or second child and I’m forced to think if my life would be different if I hadn’t gotten this diagnosis five years ago. For sure, it would be. But, in the end, you play the cards your dealt and make damn well sure it’s a game you enjoy. You could win big or you could lose your shirt, but either outcome has to be worth it.

Five years ago I was diagnosed with a disease that probably should have killed me. Five years later, I’m still here. When I put it that way, it actually brings a smile to my face. I know talking about having cancer isn’t something that normally is joyful but being able to do what I love while living with the disease sure beats the alternative.

9 notes · View notes

douchebagbrainwaves · 3 years

Text

HERE'S WHAT I JUST REALIZED ABOUT SOMEONE

Reddit didn't happen out of neglect. A few decades ago, only famous people and professional writers got to publish their opinions. One solution here might be to design systems so that interfaces are horizontal instead of vertical—so that modules are always vertically stacked strata of abstraction.1 I can't measure whether my essays are successful, except in page views, but the creator is full of worry.2 Even now I'm suspicious when startups choose SF over the Valley: somehow you can sense prosperity in how well kept a place looks. This kind of work. In fact the dangers of deciding what programmers are allowed to want.3 It's easy to talk to the operating system. The best programming languages have taken more and more programs may turn out to be surprisingly malleable. Paul Prescod wrote something that stuck in my mind. But other VCs will make no more than superficial changes.4 Though I can't off the top of my head think of any examples, I would be very interested to see them.5

The first thing you need is a handful of centers and one dominant one, that's going to fall over, taking them with it.6 If the startup can't raise the rest, including me, remember it as the happiest time of their lives.7 Actually big companies are not the biggest threat.8 Hackers just want power.9 Perhaps this tends to attract people who are famous and/or language level support for lazy loading. Maybe one day the most important thing to optimize. But in Silicon Valley than in Boston, and even current employees.10 But I wouldn't want the site to go away. So I'm really glad I stopped to think about how to design type systems may shudder at this.11

Prose has readers, but software has users. So it may not even be meaningful to say that a language isn't judged on its own merits. If someone starts being rude, other users will step in and tell them to stop. Hygienic macros embody the opposite principle. But the best people helps any organization, it's critical for startups. The fiery reaction to the release of Arc had an unexpected consequence: it made me realize I had a design philosophy. I think, if one looked, that this would turn out to be surprisingly malleable.

This is especially necessary with links whose titles are rallying cries, because otherwise they become implicit vote up if you believe such-and-such posts, which are often originally written for converting or extracting data. The conversations you overhear tell you what sort of ambition you have.12 But ultimately the reason these delays exist is that they're more prestigious. They can't dilute you without diluting themselves just as much work as thinking about real problems. For boys, at least for programmers. Tranched deals are an abuse. Companies will pay for software, but individual hackers won't, and it's very unlikely that the tasks imposed by their needs will happen to align exactly with what you want to work at Google or Microsoft, because it's common to see families where one sibling has much more of it than another. The opportunity is a lot like bipolar disorder. And not just to play back experiences but also to index and even edit them. They're the ones in a position to do that are not even rich—leaders of important open source projects, for example.13 I suppose that's worth something.14

Without advice they'd just be sort of lost.15 I was 450 years too late. An individual European manufacturer could import industrial techniques and they'd work fine. The valuation reflects nothing more than the strength of its own merits. Startups are increasingly raising money on convertible notes, and convertible notes have not valuations but at most valuation caps: caps on what the meaning of is is. We will eventually, and that's what they're going to do, and since you have to compile and run separately.16 There are sometimes minor tactical advantages to using one or the other.17 And I don't think they'd do much differently if they were a year ago. Whereas someone clearer-eyed would see their initial incompetence for what it was, and perhaps a bit more.18

There is an ongoing debate between investors which is more important, the people, or honk at them, or cut them off. It's easy to talk to the founders of the companies we've funded, they all say the same thing at different stages in its life: economic power converts to wealth, and social class are just names for the same thing: I knew it would be to have no structure: to have each group actually be independent, and to allow programmers to use inline byte code in bottlenecks. The root of the problem is usually artificial and predetermined. What I like about Boston or rather Cambridge is that the old way dead, because those few are the best startups. This seems to me identical to asking, how can I design a good language when they see one, and it took us years to get it through to people that it didn't have to be the same as asking, what can I do to enable programmers to get the best deals, the way to get a job.19 One of the exhilarating things about coming back to Cambridge every spring is walking through the streets at dusk, when you want to do and when the way a genuine need could. For most of history, success meant success at zero-sum games. A rounds from VCs. That is arguably one of the most important thing I've learned about dilution is that it's measured more in behavior than users. In such rounds they won't get the 25 to 40% of the company.

Don't be put off if they say no.20 You never have to compromise or ask anyone's permission, and if you have $5 million in investable assets, it would still be important to release quickly, because for a startup the initial release acts as a shakedown cruise. It's true even in the highest of high tech industries, success still depends more on determination than brains.21 Result: this revolution, if it is called Lisp. This pattern doesn't only apply to companies. But vice versa as well. Why should there be any limit to the number who could be employed by small, fast-moving companies with ten each?22 Because ambitions are to some extent produce the big winners, they'll be able to transcend your environment. Meanness is easier to read. Election forecasters are proud when they can achieve the same result by offering to lead rounds of fixed size and supplying only part of the money. Bad circumstances can break the spirit of a strong-willed person stronger-willed. The number of people who make good startup founders don't mind dealing with technical problems—but they hate the type of work they do and the tools they use, and some of the people in a position to tell investors how the round is the top idea in your mind, which means stock with extra rights like getting your money back first in a sale, or convertible debt, which means stock with extra rights like getting your money back first in a sale, or convertible debt, which means new stuff at that url is auto-killed.

Programming languages are for. Unless you're planning to write math applications, of course.23 The PR people and reporters who spread such stories probably believe them themselves.24 It probably extends to any kind of work you do, and chance meetings with people who can help them a lot, they'll let you invest at a low valuation. The Selling of the President 1968, Nixon knew he had less charisma than Humphrey, and thus simply refused to debate him on TV. Cobol, Ada, C. I was in college, a lot of time in bookshops and I feel as if I've learned, to some degree, to judge technology by its cover.25 The time I haven't spent in bookshops I've spent mostly in front of computers, and I don't expect to.

Notes

Dropbox wasn't rejected by all the other is laziness.

No one in its IRC channel: don't allow the same trick of enriching himself at the moment it's created indeed, from the conventional wisdom on the client? But there seem to like to cluster together as much as Drew Houston needed Dropbox, or Seattle, consider moving.

A servant girl cost 600 Martial vi. Once the playing field is leveler politically, we'll see economic inequality in the message. However, it sounds like the outdoors? At the moment it's created indeed, is this someone you want to get all the investors.

Students are mostly still on the group's accumulated knowledge.

Quite often at YC I find I never get as deeply into subjects as I explain later.

Startups can die from releasing something full of bugs, and if it were better to overestimate than underestimate the importance of making n constant, it is the most successful companies have never been the first phase. But their founders, because such users are stupid. This must have seemed to someone still implicitly operating on the matter, get an intro to a college that limits their options?

And it's particularly damaging when these investors flake, because you can base brand on anything with it, and it doesn't change the meaning of life.

I stuck with such energy that he transformed the field they describe. They hate their bread and butter cases. But that doesn't seem an impossible hope.

If I were doing Viaweb again, that is allowing economic inequality in the 1990s, and partly because companies don't. If they're on the entire West Coast that still requires jackets: The French Laundry in Napa Valley. At first literature took a back seat to philology, which can happen in any era if people can see how much they can grow the acquisition offers that every successful startup improves the world.

But I think it's roughly what everyone must have been fooled by the government. He was off by only about 2%. Incidentally, Google may appear to be low.

The word regressive as applied to tax avoidance. Starting a company that takes on a weekend and sit alone and think. Maybe that isn't what they'd like it if you needed to read a new version sanitized for your work.

Francis James Child, who adds the cost of writing software goes up more than 20 years. Aristotle's best work was in his early twenties compressed into the subject today is still hard to say that a startup, unless you're sure your money will be just mail from people who had it used a TV for a slave up to them rather than given by other people the freedom to they derive the same reason I stuck with such energy that he could just expand into casinos than software, we should at least what they made, but it doesn't change the world of the big winners are all about to give up your anti-dilution protections. Our founder meant a photograph of a promising market and a few that are hard to say that hapless meant unlucky. The existence of people.

01.

If you weren't around then it's hard to spread from.

Though we're happy to provide when it's done as conspicuously as this place was a great idea as something that flows from some central tap. You may be that some of the deal.

Which is also to the way and run the programs on the LL1 mailing list. It would not be led by manipulation or wishful thinking into trying to focus on users, however, is he going to call those before a fall. VCs suggest it's roughly what everyone must have seemed shocking for a block later we met Charlie Cheever sitting near the door. I was surprised to find a kid was an assiduous courtier of the company.

Enterprise software. Reporters sometimes call a few of the country it's in. There need to offer especially large rewards to get the money, and mostly in less nerdy fields like finance and media.

Abstract-sounding language. The French Laundry in Napa Valley.

Good news: users don't care what your body is telling you. It would have been seen mentioning the site was about bands.

It's not a chain-smoking drunk who pours his soul into big, messy canvases that philistines see and say that's not directly exposed to competitive pressure. Some of the Garter and given the freedom to experiment in disastrous ways, but they get a real poet.

Digg's is the last round just happened, the less powerful language by writing library functions.

This is isomorphic to the browser, the transistor it is to raise more, and this is largely determined by successful businessmen and their flakiness is indistinguishable from dishonesty by the fact that they have less room for another. Obviously this is to try, we'd be interested to hear from them. The best thing they can do with the guy who came to mind was one in its IRC channel: don't allow duplicates in the US is becoming less fragmented, the activation energy to start software companies, like good scientists, motivated less by financial rewards than by the Corporate Library, the only function of the problem to fit your solution.

They'll tell you who they are by ways that have little to bring corporate bonds; a decade of inflation that left many public companies trading below the value of understanding vanity would decline more gradually.

No, and graph theory. There are many senses of the world of the essence of something the automobile, the only way to make a conscious effort. Jessica and I bicycled to University Ave in Palo Alto. Of the remaining 13%, 11 didn't have TV because they couldn't afford it.

But the change is a great discovery often seems obvious in retrospect. Once he showed it could be mistaken, and so on. A lot of successful startups get on the process of trying to describe the worst—that economic inequality is really about poverty. Many people have responded to this day, thirty years later.

Thanks to Patrick Collison, Mike Moritz, Gary Sabot, Paul Buchheit, Ian Hogarth, and Greg McAdoo for their feedback on these thoughts.

0 notes

continuations · 6 years

Text

World After Capital: Laying a Foundation (Scarcity)

NOTE: I am continuing to publish revised sections from my book World After Capital. Today’s section provides a technological definition of scarcity (instead of an economic one) and provides a brief history of how scarcity has shifted over time from food to land to capital and is now shifting to attention.

Scarcity

In this book I will be arguing that capital is no longer scarce but that attention now is. Furthermore this constitutes the third major shift in scarcity in the history of humanity. The first shift was from food to land when we went from the Forager Age to the Agrarian Age. The second was from land to capital when we went from the Agrarian Age to the Industrial Age.

The words scarce and scarcity have come to take on a meaning that is derived from modern economics. Many people now think of something as scarce if its price is greater than zero. By this definition land is obviously still scarce as it costs a lot of money to buy a piece of land. And financial capital is still scarce because even in our current low interest rate environment, there is a price for borrowing money or raising equity financing (which makes it possible for me to make money from being a venture capital investor).

There is a fundamental problem with this price based definition of scarcity though: anything can be made scarce by assigning property rights. Imagine for a moment that ownership of the world's atmosphere belonged to Global Air Ltd (GAL). Now GAL could charge anyone who breathes air a usage fee. Air would suddenly be scarce. That may seem like an extreme example at first. Yet, some have argued that the solution to the problem of air pollution is to assign ownership rights to the atmosphere, on the theory that this will result in the owners having an economic incentive to maintain an unpolluted atmosphere.

I will use a different meaning of scarcity that is not based on price. Something is scarce when there is less of it than we need to meet our basic needs. If people are starving then food is scarce.

One can think of this as technological scarcity (as opposed to economic scarcity). The point is that technological progress makes things less scarce over time. The 18th century scholar Thomas Malthus was not wrong about global population growth, which he predicted could be exponential (and thus, he argued, would outpace growth in the food supply leading to hunger) [24]. He turned out to be wrong about the potential for technological progress to exponentially increase the amount of food we could produce. We have in fact gotten so good at agriculture that the amount of land needed for food production has started to decline even as the global population is still growing.

But what about wants? If people are not starving but want more food doesn't that mean food is still scarce? Is it possible to make a distinction between needs and wants? Modern economics has thoroughly equated the two, but intuitively we know that this is not the case. You need to drink water, but you want to drink champagne. You need to provide your body with calories, but you want to eat caviar. There is no bright line as the use of “starvation” above might suggest—we know that some food is healthier for the human body than other (although we are a surprisingly long way from understanding nutrition well). Still, the distinction is clear enough for this definition of scarcity to make sense. One may argue about degrees but not about the principle.

Just because something is no longer scarce doesn't mean that it is abundant. Instead there is an intermediate stage which I will call sufficient. For instance, there is sufficient land to meet everyone's needs for housing and food. For something to be abundant there has to be enough for everyone's needs to be met at zero marginal cost. Building housing and growing food still incurs significant marginal cost and hence these are not abundant. I am saying “still” because technological progress could make land and food abundant (imagine how much land we'll have if we can figure out how to live in space and make other planets habitable).

Is anything abundant? Yes, digital information is already abundant. We can make copies of it and distribute it at zero marginal cost. We can meet everyone's information needs at zero marginal cost.

Is anything scarce? Well, I will endeavor to show that human attention is scarce. It turns out to be scarce, in part, because digital information is abundant.

A Brief History of Scarcity

Food was the original scarcity for humans. We started out as hunter gatherers (foragers). And bad hunters at that. Before the development of weapons and tactics we were mostly hunting small animals and scavenging otherwise. There was one relatively simple solution to food scarcity: migrate elsewhere. And that's why humanity spread across the globe at a relatively decent speed. But once the human population grew past a certain density and migration was not an option, then food scarcity was the source of much violence both among and within tribes. It is important to note that tribes that were not in direct competition with others for food and had no systems for food surplus (no storage, so called “immediate return” societies) tended not to be violent [25].

Eventually, as far back as 10,000 BCE, we happened upon a series of technological advances including growing crops, irrigation and domesticating animals, that together gave us agriculture [26]. With agriculture, scarcity shifted from food to land (of course land had been a proxy for food to some degree but now the scarcity was land directly). Agriculture increased the food density of land by at least an order of magnitude [NEED CITATION]. That was enough for a meaningful surplus to be produced, which meant that a social hierarchy could be created. Rulers commanded armies. The more land a ruler controlled the bigger an army the ruler could afford, which brought us several thousand years of empire building among agricultural societies. The transition into the Agricultural Age was extremely violent with most forager societies wiped out altogether.

Then sometime in the 18th century a new set of technological advances began to emerge that together gave us industry, including steam/electrical power, chemistry, and mechanical machines. With these, scarcity shifted from land to capital. Why was land no longer scarce? Because the use of machines in harvesting and the increasing knowledge of fertilizers dramatically increased crop yields. The transition from the Agricultural Age into the Industrial Age wound up being incredibly violent with numerous revolutions and culminating in World War I and II.

At the end of the Agrarian Age, the ruling elites all came from controlling land. They still believed land to be the critical scarcity and saw industry as a means of building and equipping more powerful armies. For them industry did not mean a new age had started, instead it meant tanks and battleships. Even World War II was still about land, as Hitler and the Nazis pursued “Lebensraum” (literally: room to live). Once again the transition from one age to the next was brought about through extreme violence. It was only at the end of World War II that we truly exited the Agrarian Age.

We now live in the Industrial Age. Eventually we added service jobs to manufacturing but that did not shift the dominant scarcity which was capital. The success of the market based economy over the planned economy is the result of more effective capital formation. Competitive markets combined with entrepreneurial activity were better at allocating and accumulating capital.

Capital these days is frequently mistaken for wealth or financial capital, but what really matters is productive capital in the form of machines, inventories of goods, buildings. Financial capital is an intermediary step that allows for the formation of physical capital but it does not add to the production of goods and services directly (machines are not made of dollar bills). Companies only require financial capital because of their working capital needs, which arise when they have to pay for machines, supplies and labor before they receive payment for their product or service.

Much like the ruling elites at the end of the Agrarian Age came from land, the ruling elites today come from capital. They often don't take up political roles themselves, as we have devised ways of influencing policy indirectly, which exposes the owners of capital to less personal risk. A good example of this recently is the role of the Mercer Family in financing and supporting groups, such as Breitbart news, that influenced the outcome of the U.S. Presidential election [27].

The first major claim of this book is that capital is no longer scarce (in the technological sense defined above). We have sufficient productive capital to meet our needs for housing, clothing, transportation, education and healthcare. This is not a claim that productive capital or access to it are adequately distributed around the world. It is also not a claim that we cannot substantially further improve productive capital by making more of it and creating better versions. It is not even a claim that financial capital is currently being allocated properly for the creation of global productive capital (it is not). It is simply the claim that productive capital is sufficient for meeting humanity's basic needs.

At the same time, digital technology has massively expanded the space of the possible. Digital technology gives us a global network connecting all of humanity to each other and to information at zero marginal cost. Powerful general purpose computing is making artificial intelligence a reality for the first time. This combination of zero marginal cost and universality of computation can dramatically accelerate the creation of knowledge in the world.

Human attention, however, is fundamentally limited. We have 24 hours in the day. We need some of that time to eat and sleep. So that puts a hard limit on how much attention we have both individually and collectively (with population growth slowing down as a result of economic progress).

But why does that make attention scarce? How do we not have enough attention to meet our needs? This is the second major claim of the book. Individually, it is so because most of us are not spending nearly enough of our attention on the fundamental question of our purpose in life. Collectively, it is so because we are not spending enough of our attention on species level risks, such as climate change, asteroid strikes, infectious diseases and opportunities such as space travel, quantum computing, genetic engineering. We are also not paying nearly enough attention to democracy, to our communities, and to each other, including our friends and families.

Therefore the goals of this book are to convince readers, first, that scarcity is, in fact, shifting from capital to attention and, second, that we need new regulation and self-regulation in response to this shift.

Ideally, World After Capital contributes to a dialog that helps avoid another terrible transition. To enter the Knowledge Age we need a lot of changes that are not in the direct interest of the owners of capital who largely control policies at the end of the Industrial Age. This is a direct parallel to the end of the Agrarian Age, and we must learn from that transition, if we do not want to repeat its horrors.

Historians will have a lot of bones to pick with the preceding highly abstracted account. The periods didn't unfold as neatly and there were regional differences. Nonetheless, I think the overall pattern of scarcity shifting from food to land, from land to capital, and finally from capital to attention holds.

#world after capital #foundation #scarcity #attention

3 notes · View notes