columns 2024.08

(date: 2024-02-24 18:31:22)

Friday Squid Blogging: Illex Squid and Climate Change

date: 2024-02-23, updated: 2024-02-19, from: Bruce Schneier blog

There are correlations between the populations of the Illex Argentines squid and water temperatures.

As usual, you can also use this squid post to talk about the security stories in the news that I haven’t covered.

Read my blog posting guidelines here.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2024/02/friday-squid-blogging-illex-squid-and-climate-change.html Save to Pocket

AIs Hacking Websites

date: 2024-02-23, updated: 2024-02-23, from: Bruce Schneier blog

New research:

LLM Agents can Autonomously Hack Websites

Abstract: In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have become increasingly capable and can now interact with tools (i.e., call functions), read documents, and recursively call themselves. As a result, these LLMs can now function autonomously as agents. With the rise in capabilities of these agents, recent work has speculated on how LLM agents would affect cybersecurity. However, not much is known about the offensive capabilities of LLM agents.

In this work, we show that LLM agents can autonomously hack websites, performing tasks as complex as blind database schema extraction and SQL injections without human feedback. Importantly, the agent does not need to know the vulnerability beforehand. This capability is uniquely enabled by frontier models that are highly capable of tool use and leveraging extended context. Namely, we show that GPT-4 is capable of such hacks, but existing open-source models are not. Finally, we show that GPT-4 is capable of autonomously finding vulnerabilities in websites in the wild. Our findings raise questions about the widespread deployment of LLMs…

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2024/02/ais-hacking-websites.html Save to Pocket

curl HTTP/3 security audit

date: 2024-02-23, from: Daniel Stenberg Blog

An external security audit focused especially on curl’s HTTP/3 components and associated source code was recently concluded by Trail of Bits. In particular on the HTTP/3 related curl code that uses and interfaces the ngtcp2 and nghttp3 libraries, as that is so far the only HTTP/3 backend in curl that is not labeled as experimental. … Continue reading curl HTTP/3 security audit →

https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2024/02/23/curl-http-3-security-audit/ Save to Pocket

The Emerging Republican Theocracy

date: 2024-02-23, from: Robert Reich’s blog

White Christian nationalism is the creed of red America

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/republican-theocracy Save to Pocket

Yahoo Lays Off the Leaders of Engadget

date: 2024-02-23, updated: 2024-02-23, from: Daring Fireball

https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/22/24080215/engadget-layoffs-tech-news-blogs-editorial-restructuring Save to Pocket

Apple Sports and Lock Screen Live Activities

date: 2024-02-23, updated: 2024-02-23, from: Daring Fireball

https://support.apple.com/en-is/guide/iphone/iph9ac289c4d/ios Save to Pocket

Apple Sports Is Eddy Cue’s Baby

date: 2024-02-23, updated: 2024-02-23, from: Daring Fireball

https://sixcolors.com/post/2024/02/apple-sports-a-free-iphone-app-to-get-you-the-score-fast/ Save to Pocket

Friday 23 February, 2024

date: 2024-02-23, from: John Naughton’s online diary

My ol’ Burgundian Home If I had a house en Bourgogne (which, alas, I don’t), I’d like one like this. And then I’d ask Randy Newman to do a variation on this for me. Quote of the Day ”My problem … Continue reading →

https://memex.naughtons.org/friday-23-february-2024/39166/ Save to Pocket

When I met Strom Thurmond

date: 2024-02-22, from: Robert Reich’s blog

My conversation with him in an elevator

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/how-bad-was-strom-thurmond Save to Pocket

New Image/Video Prompt Injection Attacks

date: 2024-02-22, updated: 2024-02-22, from: Bruce Schneier blog

Simon Willison has been playing with the video processing capabilities of the new Gemini Pro 1.5 model from Google, and it’s really impressive.

Which means a lot of scary new video prompt injection attacks. And remember, given the current state of technology, prompt injection attacks are impossible to prevent in general.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2024/02/new-image-video-prompt-injection-attacks.html Save to Pocket

Competition-proofing

date: 2024-02-22, from: David Rosenthal’s blog

Source

Our economy is dominated by five aging tech giants—Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, and Microsoft. Each of these firms was founded more than twenty years ago: Apple and Microsoft in the 1970s, Google and Amazon in the 1990s, and Facebook in 2004. Each of them grew by successfully commercializing a disruptive technology—personal computers (Apple), operating systems (Microsoft), online shopping (Amazon), search engines (Google), and social networks (Facebook). Each of them displaced the incumbents that came before them. But in the last twenty years, no company has commercialized a new technology in a way that threatens the tech giants. Why?

While there are many reasons for the tech giants’ continued dominance, we think an important and overlooked one is that they have learned how to coopt disruption. They identify potentially disruptive technologies, use their money to influence the startups developing them, strategically dole out access to the resources the startups need to grow, and seek regulation that will make it harder for the startups to compete. When a threat emerges, they buy it off. And after they acquire a startup, they redirect its people and assets to their own innovation needs.

a company that is started with the goal of being swallowed by a tech giant probably isn’t contributing much to society.

Introduction

• “large incumbents can take advantage of economies of scale” not just in manufacturing, but also in marketing an distribution by exploiting their existing customer relationships.
• “Large incumbents can also take advantage of economies of scope. Innovation creates “involuntary spillovers”—new knowledge that has economic value beyond the specific product that the firm was developing.”
• “large incumbents can access capital at a lower cost” for example from retained earnings from their cash cows.
• “large incumbents may have another potential advantage—a longer investment time horizon” even more so now with the compression of VC time horizons.

1. “their success will cannibalize their own market share” or “More generally, a monopolist has diminished incentives to introduce new products, improve product quality, or lower prices because any new sales generated replace its existing sales.” Economists call this “Arrow’s replacement effect”; more specifically: “The general lesson is, all else equal, the larger a firm’s market share and the less it is threatened by competition, the weaker its incentives to innovate. So we should expect large incumbents to not innovate much. And if they can dispense with the competitors rather than have to compete with them, they will do that.”
2. “their managers prefer to deliver incremental innovations to their existing customers”. Unlike Arrow’s theory, “Christensen’s theory of disruptive innovation, … focuses on the career incentives of middle managers … Incumbent managers have an incentive to deliver sustaining innovations—incremental improvements in quality to the firm’s existing products that will please its existing customers. But they have substantial disincentives to pursue projects that upset the apple cart, even if doing so would bring new customers to the firm” The fundamental problem is that “Housing an innovation project inside a firm with diverse lines of business creates conflict with those other businesses. Some firm assets—cash, cloud computing, equipment, facilities, and engineers’ time—are rivalrous and finite, so executives must be willing to fight internal constituencies to devote those resources to innovation.” Ingenuity, NASA’s wildly successful Mars helicopter is a good example, as Eric Berger reports in Before Ingenuity ever landed on Mars, scientists almost managed to kill it. It was competing for cost, weight and risk with Perseverance’s primary mission.
3. “their single veto point decision-making structure encourages risk-aversion” More specifically: “Inside a large incumbent, decisions about whether to fund an innovative project must pass through one veto point. In the venture capital market, many competing investors independently decide whether to finance an innovative idea. Inside a firm, an employee with an innovative idea must pitch an idea to managers who ultimately report to one executive gate-keeper. In the venture capital market, if a would-be startup founder pitches an idea to ten VC firms, and nine of them are not persuaded, the idea gets funded.” The advantage of market-based finance over internal finance applies not just to the initiation but also the continuation of an innovation project. Inside a firm, an executive who has soured on a project can terminate it. In the venture capital market, when a startup’s initial investors grow skeptical, the company can still pitch outsiders on infusing more cash.” The authors make this important point (my emphasis): “And while economists often describe markets as efficient, there is no reason to believe individual corporate executives make efficient (or even rational) decisions. Just ask Twitter. Markets work not because private executives make good decisions but because the ones who make bad decisions get driven out. But that dynamic only works with competition.”
4. “they cannot appropriately compensate employees working on innovation projects.” The reason they cannot is that: “Startups solve this problem by giving employees stock options. Every employee with significant equity knows that if the startup successfully exits, they will be rewarded. Stock in a large, diversified public company does not create similar incentives. The incentives are diluted because the value of the stock will be affected by too many variables unrelated to the success of the specific innovation project.” And that: “large firms do not recognize internal “property rights” to innovations that employees develop. If they did, employees might become reluctant to share information. But not protecting internal property rights gives innovative employees incentive to leave. If employees at a large firm found their own startup and raise venture capital to fund it, they will earn a much greater share of the profits of the innovation.”

Network effects

The tech giants’ core businesses are built on platforms. A platform is an intermediary in a two-sided market. It connects users on one side of the market with users on the other side for transactions or interactions.
…
Platforms tend to exhibit network effects—the addition of a new user increases the value of a platform to existing users and attracts new users.

Self-preferencing

Amazon, for example, both invites third party vendors to sell their products in its online marketplace and sells its own house brands that compete with those vendors. Amazon has a powerful advantage in that competition. It has access to data on all of its competitors—who their customers are, which products are selling well, and which prices work best. And it controls which ads consumers see when they search for a specific product. Assuming Amazon uses that information to prefer its own products to those of its competitors (either by pricing strategically or by promoting its own products in search results) – something alleged but not yet proven in a pending antitrust case – the result is to bias competition. Vendors cannot realistically protest Amazon’s self-preferencing (or just go elsewhere) because Amazon has such a dominant share in the online retail market.

Paying for defaults

Alphabet pays Apple a reported $18 billion (with a b) each year for Google to be the default search engine on iOS devices. Android and iOS together account for 99% of the U.S. mobile operating system market. Consequently, almost everyone who uses a smartphone in America is accustomed to Google search. Alphabet claims that “competition is just a click away.” But research and experience have shown that defaults can be somewhat sticky. So controlling the default position can give Alphabet (or whoever wins the Apple bid) an advantage. That said, someone has to be the default, and it might be better for consumers if the default is the search engine most users already prefer. The real problem might be the idea of paying for placement, whoever wins the bidding war.

Cloning

Cloning is only objectionable if the tech giant wins out not by competition on the merits, but by exclusionary conduct.

Google+, Google’s effort to build a social media service that combined the best of Facebook and Twitter was an abject failure. Apple’s effort to control the music world’s move to streaming by offering its own alternative to Spotify hasn’t prevented Spotify from dominating music streaming and eclipsing the once-vibrant (and Apple-dominated) market for music downloads. Meta’s effort to copy Snap, then TikTok, by introducing Stories and Reels has not proven terribly successful, and certainly has not prevented those companies from building their markets.

If the product is cloneable, then why would you buy the company and burn cash paying off its VCs?

Inadequate Explanation

Microsoft enjoyed strong network effects in the 1990s as the dominant maker of operating system software – far more dominant than it is today. It cloned internet browser technology from upstarts like Netscape, and it engaged in anticompetitive conduct designed to ensure that it, not Netscape, became the browser of choice.82 But Microsoft’s victory over Netscape was short-lived. New startups – Mozilla and then Google – came out of nowhere and took the market away from it. Microsoft still benefits from network effects, and it still uses cloning and self-preferencing to send users to its Edge browser. But it doesn’t work. Microsoft employed all the tools of a dominant firm in a network market, but it still faced disruption.

Coopting disruption

• “First, you would learn as much as you can about which companies had the capability to develop disruptive innovations and try to steer them away from competing with you – perhaps by partnering with them, or perhaps by investing in them.”
• “Second, you would make sure that those companies could not access the critical resources they would need to transform their innovation into a disruptive product.”
• “Third, you would tell your government relations team to seek regulation that would build a competitive moat around your position and keep disruption out.”
• “Fourth, if one of the companies you were tracking nevertheless did start to develop a disruptive product, you would want extract that innovation—and choke off the potential competition—in an acquisition.”

• “built a powerful reconnaissance network covering emerging competitive threats by investing in startups as corporate VCs and by cultivating relationships with financial VCs.”
• “accumulated massive quantities of data that are essential for many software and AI innovations, and they dole out access to this data and to their networks selectively.”
• “asked legislators to regulate the tech industry—in a way that will buttress incumbents.”
• “repeatedly bought potentially competitive startups in a way that has flown—until a few years ago—below the antitrust radar.”

The Cisco story exemplifies how the venture capital market, as a market, is better at exploring a series of risky ideas than a firm with a single risk-averse gatekeeper. It also illustrates how the advantages of a large incumbent—in this case access to markets and existing customer relationships—can sometimes extract more market value out of a technology than a new entrant.

Why Is Cooption Bad?

Our claim here is that the same dynamics that inhibit disruptive innovation by longstanding employees of large incumbents inhibit disruptive innovation by new employees from acquired startups.
…
The tech giants win from coopting disruption even though it destroys social value. In fact, they benefit in two ways. They make faster incremental progress on the sustaining innovations that they want. They get the new code, the valuable intellectual property, and the fresh ideas of the startup. And, critically, they also kill off a competitor. They no longer have to worry about the startup actually developing the more disruptive innovation and leapfrogging them or other tech giants acquiring the startup and using its assets to compete with them.

Remedies?

• Unlocking Directorates — under the Clayton Act “interlocking officers and directors between companies that compete, even in part, are illegal per se – without any inquiry into whether the companies in fact restrained competition because of their overlapping interests or whether the conduct offered procompetitive benefits.” Companies with less than $4.1M in revenue are exampt, which excludes most startups; this should be revised.
• Limiting Leveraging of Data and Networks — “we would impose on incumbent tech monopolists a presumptive duty of nondiscrimination in access where the defendant (1) provides or sells data or network access to at least some unaffiliated companies and (2) refuses to provide or sell the same data or network access to the plaintiff company on comparable terms, but (3) the plaintiff does not operate a competing network or otherwise compete with the defendant in the market from which it collected the relevant data.”
• Regulating Regulation — “Done right, regulation of technology can be beneficial and even necessary to the development of that technology, minimizing the risk of harm to third parties and ensuring that the world views the technology as safe and trustworthy. But all too often regulation has become a way to insulate incumbents from competition, with predictable results.” The authors’ suggestions exemplify this difficulty, being rather vague and aspirational.
• Blocking Cooptive Acquisitions — this is the most complex of the four proposals, and builds on Nascent Competitors by C. Scott Hemphill & Tim Wu, who write:
  

  We favor an enforcement policy that prohibits anticompetitive conduct that is reasonably capable of contributing significantly to the maintenance of the incumbent s market power. That approach implies enforcement even where the competitive significance of the nascent competitor is uncertain.

  Justifying blocking mergers because of a nascent threat that might never materialize is problematic. But it is only more so than the current way anti-trust works, by projecting likely harm to consumer welfare, which also might never materialize (although it almost always does). Lemley and Wansley explain the dilemma:
  

  antitrust enforcers need a strategy for blocking cooptive acquisitions that works within existing case law (or plausible improvements to that law) and is surgical enough to avoid chilling investment.

  Some cases are obvious:
  

  For cooptive acquisitions like Facebook/Instagram deal, we think Hemphill and Wu’s strategy makes sense. Zuckerberg’s email arguing for acquiring startups like Instagram because “they could be very disruptive to us” is a smoking gun of anticompetitive intent.

  But Lemley and Wansley go further, arguing for blocking megers based the startup’s ability to innovate distruptive technology:
  

  Of course, an approach to policing startup acquisitions based on innovation capabilities need limits. Many startups have some innovation capabilities that could have a significant effect on competition. We can cabin enforcement in three ways—by focusing on specific technologies and specific firms and by looking at the cumulative effects of multiple acquisitions.

  Their examples of technologies include generative AI and virtual and augmented reality, both cases where it is already too late. The companies they identify “Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, and Meta” are all veterans of multiple acquisitions in these areas. But they argue that committing to challenge fuure mergers:
  

  would create socially desirable incentives for startups. A startup developing one of the listed technologies would gain stronger incentives to turn its innovations into the products that its management team believed would garner the highest value on the open market—rather than the one most valuable to the tech giants. They would also gain stronger incentives to build a truly independent business and go public since an acquisition by the tech giants would be a less likely exit.

I think these would all be worthwhile steps, and I’m all in favor of updating anti-trust law and, even better, actually enforcing the laws on the books. But I am skeptical that the government can spot potentially disruptive technologies before the tech giants spot and acquire them. Especially since the government can’t be embedded in the VC industry the way the tech giants are. Note that many of the harms Lemley and Wansley identify happen shortly after the acquisition. Would forcing Meta to divest Instagram at this late date restore the innovations the acquisition killed off?

https://blog.dshr.org/2024/02/competition-proofing.html Save to Pocket

A 101-Year-Old’s Fight Against Book Banning

date: 2024-02-22, from: Dan Rather’s Steady

Inspiring young 92-year-olds like me

https://steady.substack.com/p/a-101-year-olds-fight-against-book Save to Pocket

My surprise at yesterday’s Substack response

date: 2024-02-22, from: Robert Reich’s blog

Friends, I was going to write something else for today, but I was so surprised by the response to my Office Hours Substack letter and poll yesterday that I felt the question needed more airing. It’s a question I’ve been asked a lot recently: Should Joe Biden step aside and allow Democrats to have an open convention to choose their candidate?

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/my-surprise-at-yesterdays-substack Save to Pocket

18K commits

date: 2024-02-22, from: Daniel Stenberg Blog

It took me 422 days to do my most recent 1,000 commits in the curl source code repository. Now at 18,001 commits. This is the most recent.

https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2024/02/22/18k-commits/ Save to Pocket

Coming Soon: Apple Immersive Video Film With Highlights of MLS 2023 Playoffs

date: 2024-02-22, updated: 2024-02-22, from: Daring Fireball

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/02/2024-mls-season-kicks-off-today-exclusively-on-mls-season-pass-on-apple-tv/ Save to Pocket

★ Apple Sports

date: 2024-02-22, updated: 2024-02-22, from: Daring Fireball

Apple Sports exemplifies why it’s a better idea to design smaller, more focused apps.

https://daringfireball.net/2024/02/apple_sports Save to Pocket

[Sponsor] Sonar Mac App for GitHub/GitLab Issues

date: 2024-02-22, updated: 2024-02-22, from: Daring Fireball

https://sonartasks.com?utm_source=daring-fireball&utm_campaign=FY24Q1-daringfireball&utm_content=2024-02-DF-feed-post Save to Pocket

DISPUTED, not REJECTED

date: 2024-02-21, from: Daniel Stenberg Blog

I keep insisting that the CVE system is broken and that the database of existing CVEs hosted by MITRE (and imported into lots of other databases) is full of questionable content and plenty of downright lies. A primary explanation for us being in this ugly situation is that it is simply next to impossible to … Continue reading DISPUTED, not REJECTED →

https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2024/02/21/disputed-not-rejected/ Save to Pocket

Details of a Phone Scam

date: 2024-02-21, updated: 2024-02-23, from: Bruce Schneier blog

First-person account of someone who fell for a scam, that started as a fake Amazon service rep and ended with a fake CIA agent, and lost $50,000 cash. And this is not a naive or stupid person.

The details are fascinating. And if you think it couldn’t happen to you, think again. Given the right set of circumstances, it can.

It happened to Cory Doctorow.

EDITED TO ADD (2/23): More scams, these involving timeshares.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2024/02/details-of-a-phone-scam.html Save to Pocket

How does a changed market affect Developer Relations?

date: 2024-02-21, from: Chris Heilmann’s blog

Today, 21/02/2024, I will be opening a live event called Developer Program Leaders: Main Challenges in Developer Relations. Here’s the writeup of what I will be covering in 10 minutes: What is Developer Advocacy? According to the The Developer Advocacy Handbook written in 2009, here’s what a Developer Evangelist/Advocate does: A developer evangelist is a […]

https://christianheilmann.com/2024/02/21/how-does-a-changed-market-affect-developer-relations/ Save to Pocket

Office Hours: Should Biden step aside and allow an open Democratic convention?

date: 2024-02-21, from: Robert Reich’s blog

The problem isn’t just his age. It’s that he’s looking and acting frail, and most voters believe he’s too old.

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/office-hours-should-biden-step-aside Save to Pocket

Wednesday 21 February, 2024

date: 2024-02-21, from: John Naughton’s online diary

After Vermeer Quote of the Day ”Everything will be all right, and, even if it isn’t, we’ll have the consolation of having lived honest lives.” Alexei Navalny (h/t John Seeley) Musical alternative to the morning’s radio news Chris McMullan | … Continue reading →

https://memex.naughtons.org/wednesday-21-february-2024/39160/ Save to Pocket

5G is ‘ now’ eating cable’s lunch

date: 2024-02-20, from: Om Malik blog

It is not uncommon to hear the question: what is 5G really good for? After all, it doesn’t change the current applications, it doesn’t change our mobile experience too much from the more advanced version of LTE mobile broadband that is widely available around the world. So, again, what is 5G good for? How about …

https://om.co/2024/02/20/5g-is-now-eating-cables-lunch/ Save to Pocket

The Cost of Courage

date: 2024-02-20, from: Dan Rather’s Steady

Courage is the moral strength to venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty, according to Merriam-Webster. It comes from the Latin cor, meaning heart. My father instilled in me a respect for the word and the ideal when I was very ill as a young child.

https://steady.substack.com/p/the-cost-of-courage Save to Pocket

Microsoft Is Spying on Users of Its AI Tools

date: 2024-02-20, updated: 2024-02-23, from: Bruce Schneier blog

Microsoft announced that it caught Chinese, Russian, and Iranian hackers using its AI tools—presumably coding tools—to improve their hacking abilities.

From their report:

In collaboration with OpenAI, we are sharing threat intelligence showing detected state affiliated adversaries—tracked as Forest Blizzard, Emerald Sleet, Crimson Sandstorm, Charcoal Typhoon, and Salmon Typhoon—using LLMs to augment cyberoperations.

The only way Microsoft or OpenAI would know this would be to spy on chatbot sessions. I’m sure the terms of service—if I bothered to read them—gives them that permission. And of course it’s no surprise that Microsoft and OpenAI (and, presumably, everyone else) are spying on our usage of AI, but this confirms it…

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2024/02/microsoft-is-spying-on-users-of-its-ai-tools.html Save to Pocket

The poster child for the perils of dynastic wealth

date: 2024-02-20, from: Robert Reich’s blog

Four generations of Mellons are now bankrolling Trump

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/why-timothy-mellon-is-the-poster Save to Pocket

There Were 3D Cameras Capturing the NBA Slam Dunk Contest

date: 2024-02-19, updated: 2024-02-19, from: Daring Fireball

https://appleinsider.com/articles/24/02/18/apples-3d-video-cameras-spotted-during-nba-slam-dunk-contest Save to Pocket

Reunited with Vision Pro

date: 2024-02-19, from: Om Malik blog

Your body has a weird way of reminding you of your “age.” For me, that reminder came in the form of jetlag. There was a time when my jet lag would be gone in a day when I would fly back from Delhi, but this time it has taken three days to bounce back and adjust to California time. No harm was …

https://om.co/2024/02/19/reunited-with-vision-pro/ Save to Pocket

EU Court of Human Rights Rejects Encryption Backdoors

date: 2024-02-19, updated: 2024-02-19, from: Bruce Schneier blog

The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that breaking end-to-end encryption by adding backdoors violates human rights:

Seemingly most critically, the [Russian] government told the ECHR that any intrusion on private lives resulting from decrypting messages was “necessary” to combat terrorism in a democratic society. To back up this claim, the government pointed to a 2017 terrorist attack that was “coordinated from abroad through secret chats via Telegram.” The government claimed that a second terrorist attack that year was prevented after the government discovered it was being coordinated through Telegram chats…

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2024/02/eu-court-of-human-rights-rejects-encryption-backdoors.html Save to Pocket

The difference between leaders and thugs

date: 2024-02-19, from: Robert Reich’s blog

Thoughts on Presidents Day

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/netanyahu-putin-and-trump Save to Pocket

Epic Games Store Coming to iOS This Year in the EU

date: 2024-02-19, updated: 2024-02-19, from: Daring Fireball

https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/news/epic-games-store-2023-year-in-review Save to Pocket

Monday 19 February, 2024

date: 2024-02-19, from: John Naughton’s online diary

W.B.’s last resting place Drumcliff Churchyard, Co Sligo. We always pay him a visit when we’re on the road to Donegal. Quote of the Day ”I don’t know the question, but sex is definitely the answer.” Woody Allen Musical alternative … Continue reading →

https://memex.naughtons.org/monday-19-february-2024/39149/ Save to Pocket

‘It‘s a Good Day’

date: 2024-02-18, from: Dan Rather’s Steady

A Reason To Smile

https://steady.substack.com/p/its-a-good-day Save to Pocket

Sunday caption contest: money troubles?

date: 2024-02-18, from: Robert Reich’s blog

And last week’s winner

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/sunday-caption-contest-money-troubles Save to Pocket