From John Broich in The Conversation (via Smithsonian Magazine^[1]):

How to cover the rise of a political leader who’s left a paper trail of anti-constitutionalism, racism and the encouragement of violence? Does the press take the position that its subject acts outside the norms of society? Or does it take the position that someone who wins a fair election is by definition “normal,” because his leadership reflects the will of the people?

These are the questions that confronted the U.S. press after the ascendance of fascist leaders in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and 1930s.

First published in December 2016. Our biggest newspapers have learned nothing since, and—dare I say—are even worse now.

By the later 1930s, most U.S. journalists realized their mistake in underestimating Hitler or failing to imagine just how bad things could get.

When will today’s journalists come to the same realization about Trump?

What will historians write about today’s newspapers one hundred years hence?

I linked to this fascinating, enlightening, and, frankly, terrifying article from Timothy W. Ryback in The Atlantic (Apple News+) in my previous piece, but it deserves its own post. I’ve referenced it a lot since January 20, 2025. Though I was broadly aware of Hitler’s rapid rise and subsequent consolidation of power, I wasn’t aware of just how quickly it happened, nor how “democratically” it was done:

In one of the most astonishing political transformations in the history of democracy, Hitler set about destroying a constitutional republic through constitutional means. What follows is a step-by-step account of how Hitler systematically disabled and then dismantled his country’s democratic structures and processes in less than two months’ time—specifically, one month, three weeks, two days, eight hours, and 40 minutes. The minutes, as we will see, mattered.

I was already convinced Trump was America’s Hitler. After reading this article, and watching Elon Musk dismantle government agencies, I thought, Musk is Trump’s Wilhelm Frick, sent in to dismantle everything, with little oversight.

But maybe I have it wrong. Maybe Trump is President Paul von Hindenburg and it’s Musk who’s the Chancellor who usurps all power.

Regardless of who’s playing which role, since the inauguration, it’s felt like this country is speedrunning an autocracy/oligarchy challenge, with Trump seemingly trying to best Hitler’s democracy destroying record. I’ve wondered, more than once, how we will recognize when we’ve crossed the democracy rubicon? What’s the sign we’ve hit our “53 Days”?

Has it already passed, after Trump ceded power to an unelected, non-Senate-confirmed billionaire, targeted the most vulnerable, and purged the country’s military leadership?

Is it ongoing, with Congress ceding its power to the White House?

Or still to come, once Trump “acquires enough muscle to enforce his lawless proclamations,” a scenario more likely with Trump loyalists heading the FBI and Justice Department?

As you’d expect, not everyone finds this comparison appropriate:

I am not a fan of using comparisons to 1932 and Hitler.

This is not post-WWI Germany operating under the treaty of Versailles and the war reparations act, nor does the US have an inflation rate of 29,000% per month.

To me, the situations don’t have to align for the comparison to be apt. Hitler and Trump both gained power via legitimate, democratic means, and used/are using those same levers to undermine the very systems that brought them to power.

Trump admires Hitler and men like him, and is surrounded by others who do too.

I find it valuable to acknowledge the historical rhymes, even if we don’t like the meter.

Priscilla Alvarez, Jennifer Hansler, and Alayna Treene, writing for CNN:

The Trump administration is expected to invoke a sweeping wartime authority to speed up the president’s mass deportation pledge in the coming days, according to four sources familiar with the discussions.

The little-known 18th-century law, the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, gives the president tremendous authority to target and remove undocumented immigrants, though legal experts have argued it would face an uphill battle in court.

[…]

The announcement, which could come as soon as Friday, has been a moving target as officials finalize the details.

This threat isn’t new—Trump has been making it since at least September 2023—but this latest report, coming just days after the illegal detention of Mahmoud Khalil, suggests a move may indeed be imminent.

(Not to get too conspiratorial, but today—Friday—marks Day 53 of the Trump regime, which some may recognize as significant.)

Calling it an “uphill battle” is a bit of a gloss, though. Here’s the relevant section of the Act (emphasis mine):

Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies.

To my layman’s eyes, a plain reading of the Act makes it clear that it cannot be invoked without a declared war or invasion from a foreign country.

The “first” group Trump wants to use this Act against:

The primary target remains Tren de Aragua (TDA), a Venezuelan organized crime group that is now operating in the United States and other countries.

Are we supposed to believe we are at war with or threatened by an invasion from Venezuela—a country with fewer people than Texas? Does Trump even know where Venezuela is?

Attempting to use it in this situation would be, at best, misleading and at worst, blatantly illegal. Not that such trivialities matter much to Trump.

Trump wants to use this Act for one, simple reason:

Those subject to the Alien Enemies Act would not be allowed to have a court hearing or an asylum interview since they would be processed under an emergency, wartime authority — not immigration law. Instead, they would be eligible to be detained and deported, with little to no due process, under Title 50, the section of the U.S. code housing America’s war and defense laws.

Bypassing the courts and the legal system: the preferred tactic of every would-be dictator.

This Act has been invoked just three times since 1798, all in times of war. By first threatening to invoke this little-used law against a foreign criminal gang, Trump is defying us to defend them, daring us to stand with “the enemy.” After all, who’s against cleaning up our streets from dangerous gangs, right?

If he succeeds with this abuse, who gets flagged as a “member” of the gang will expand, followed by which gangs get targeted. You can bet Mexico and other South and Central American “gangs” are on his list. Muslim and African “gangs” won’t be too far behind. Eventually, it won’t even need to be couched as “members of a gang.” It’ll just be dehumanized “vermin” from “shithole countries.” By the time the country realizes what he’s doing, it will have been normalized.

Every immigrant—legal or undocumented, recently arrived or decades settled—is at risk to the whims of the Trump regime.

It’s just a matter of time before Trump starts detaining natural-born citizens, too.

Joseph Gedeon, writing for The Guardian:

The mayor of Miami Beach is attempting to evict an independent cinema from city-owned property after it screened No Other Land, the film about Palestinian displacement in the West Bank that just won the Oscar for best documentary.

Steven Meiner’s proposal would terminate O Cinema’s lease and withdraw $40,000 in promised grant funding. In a newsletter sent to residents on Tuesday, Meiner condemned the film as “a false one-sided propaganda attack on the Jewish people that is not consistent with the values of our City and residents”.

An American government official should understand that, in America, screening this movie is a First Amendment right:

“Screening movies to make sure they conform to local censors’ tastes is a practice we left behind with the red scare,” said Adam Steinbaugh, an attorney at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (Fire).

“If the first amendment doesn’t mean that a movie theater can show an Oscar-winning film, something is seriously wrong.”

Something is, of course, seriously wrong.

Madiba K. Dennie, writing in Balls and Strikes about the backlash against Justice Amy Coney Barrett for daring to dissent, even briefly, from the conservative orthodoxy:

Barrett’s fellow travelers on the right felt betrayed, and voiced that betrayal with the kind of vitriol they normally reserve for minorities and poor people. Often, when a marginalized person ventures outside of the box conservatives try to put them in, Republicans attack their credentials and character, painting them as undeserving and ungracious. Barrett, a lifelong conservative less than three years removed from casting the deciding vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, got to experience a version of that this week. Republicans have from time to time been disappointed in the Republican men on the Court too, of course, but they aren’t telling Roberts that he’s unqualified, that he has kids at home, or that he should go back to Indiana and smile on his way out. Barrett is a dutiful foot soldier of the patriarchy, but she’s still a woman.

In this circle, “DEI,” of course, means “not a white man,” and “conservatism” is all about following the white male playbook. Failure to do so will be punished, regardless of how much in the tank for their cause you otherwise are.

I fly in and out of San Francisco International Airport (SFO) several times a year—it’s my home airport—and while I know it has a lot to offer, I’ve never considered it a destination to be explored. This video has me reconsidering. Perhaps the next time I have an easy flight, I’ll get to SFO early or wander around after I land.

Listening to the music from F-Zero put me in a nostalgic mood and brought to mind another of my favorite SNES games, Axelay. It has one of the most cinematic and emotional openings I can remember, and a killer gameplay soundtrack.

The Mute City 1 (track 1) music from F-Zero was stuck in my head yesterday. A quick search on YouTube later, and I was scratching that earworm itch while reliving a beloved SNES game soundtrack from one of my most-played Super Nintendo games, without having to hunt down my console.

I love Harrison Ford and single malt scotch, and this six-part (plus teaser) campaign is a cinematic delight. I’m hoping for more installments. I shall pour myself a dram tonight. (I’ve been meaning to link it up since I found it while searching for his Jeep Super Bowl commercial. A recent “How do you pronounce it?” query reminded me—thanks, Tammy!)

This New York Times piece, from Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman, purportedly about serious disagreement inside Trump’s Cabinet over which of his sycophants are in charge, reads more like a Television Without Pity recap of an episode of The Apprentice, only with less clever writing.

It’s filled with weird quotes-that-aren’t (reading like a lightly altered transcript of a surreptitious recording), and contains some truly awful New York Times-isms, like this one:

Cabinet officials almost uniformly like the concept of what Mr. Musk set out to do — reducing waste, fraud and abuse in government — but have been frustrated by the chain saw approach to upending the government and the lack of consistent coordination.

One: There is zero reason to believe this “concept” is Musk’s goal (and plenty of evidence to believe otherwise). It’s unadulterated mendacity.

Two: It admits these cabinet officials want to bring about the destruction the US government and the pain it inflicts on the American people, just slower and with more meetings.

It’s an infuriating passage—a demonstrably false premise, paired with a disingenuous conclusion—and sanitized through the antiseptic language of propriety.

This exchange really struck me, though:

At another point, Mr. Musk insisted that people hired under diversity, equity and inclusion programs were working in control towers. Mr. Duffy pushed back and Mr. Musk did not add details […].

The exchange ended with Mr. Trump telling Mr. Duffy that he had to hire people from M.I.T. as air traffic controllers. These air traffic controllers need to be “geniuses,” he said.

Many of us have known about Musk’s racism for almost a decade, and about Trump’s for far longer, so we understand that when they say “diversity, equity and inclusion” they mean “not white men.”

The additional “tell” is the suggestion to hire from MIT, because in Trump’s mind, “geniuses” = “MIT” = “white”.

Just 7.6% of MIT’s student population is Black.

In addition to yesterday’s MacBook Air announcement, Apple dropped a two-fer: A new Mac Studio with an M4 Max and an unexpected M3 Ultra configuration.

First, the new chip. A new M3 variant is a surprise in itself; I assumed—as I think most people did—that any new chip configurations would be based on the M4. It appears, though, that there won’t be an “M4 Ultra”: Apple told Ars Technica “not every chip generation will get an ‘Ultra’ tier,” and French technology website Numerama (via Mac Rumors) was told “there are no UltraFusion connectors on the M4 Max chip” (Safari-translated from the original French), making an Ultra M4 physically impossible.

That’s a bummer (and makes me wonder about the future of an M4-based Mac Pro), but the M3 Ultra is a beast of a chip:

Apple today announced M3 Ultra, the highest-performing chip it has ever created, offering the most powerful CPU and GPU in a Mac, double the Neural Engine cores, and the most unified memory ever in a personal computer. M3 Ultra also features Thunderbolt 5 with more than 2x the bandwidth per port for faster connectivity and robust expansion. M3 Ultra is built using Apple's innovative UltraFusion packaging architecture, which links two M3 Max dies over 10,000 high-speed connections that offer low latency and high bandwidth. This allows the system to treat the combined dies as a single, unified chip for massive performance while maintaining Apple's industry-leading power efficiency. UltraFusion brings together a total of 184 billion transistors to take the industry-leading capabilities of the new Mac Studio to new heights.

And:

In fact, M3 Ultra is built for AI, including ML accelerators in the CPU, Apple’s most powerful GPU, the Neural Engine, and over 800GB/s of memory bandwidth. AI professionals can use Mac Studio with M3 Ultra to run large language models (LLMs) with over 600 billion parameters directly on device, making it the ultimate desktop for AI development.

The AI power in this chip makes me wonder if it (or something like it) powers the Private Cloud Compute servers scheduled to be built in Houston, TX.

On to the new Mac Studio itself:

Apple today announced the new Mac Studio, the most powerful Mac ever made, featuring M4 Max and the new M3 Ultra chip. The ultimate pro desktop delivers groundbreaking pro performance, extensive connectivity now with Thunderbolt 5, and new capabilities in its compact and quiet design that can live right on a desk. Mac Studio can tackle the most intense workloads with its powerful CPU, Apple’s advanced graphics architecture, higher unified memory capacity, ultrafast SSD storage, and a faster and more efficient Neural Engine.

The M4 Max Mac Studio is a significant upgrade and readily induces lust, but the M3 Ultra Mac Studio is just off the charts:

It delivers nearly 2x faster performance than M4 Max in workloads that take advantage of high CPU and GPU core counts, and massive amounts of unified memory.

That “massive amounts of unified memory”?

Mac Studio with M3 Ultra starts with 96GB of unified memory, which can be configured up to 512GB — the most unified memory ever in a personal computer — and up to 16TB of ultrafast SSD storage, so content and data can be kept locally.

I’ve been trying—and failing—to recall the last time Apple introduced a computer where the highest configuration was powered by a faster version of a previous-generation chip. It may well be unprecedented.

The M3 Ultra allows the Mac Studio to accomplish some mind-blowing feats, including driving up to eight Pro Display XDRs, and playing back up to 22 streams of 8K ProRes 422 video.

I would love to see that rig!

With great power comes great responsibility… for your credit card. The base M3 Ultra starts at $3,999 (compared to a paltry $1,999 for the M4 Max) and maxes out (ultras out?) at $14,099. Whew.

Pre-orders have already started, with availability beginning March 12.

Apple’s “Air” releases continued today, with the long anticipated M4 MacBook Air. The highlights:

• “The blazing-fast performance” of an M4 chip.
• New 12MP Center Stage camera.
• New sky blue finish, “a metallic light blue,” which, from website photos, just looks like silver to my eyes. I’m curious how it plays in person.
• Lower starting price of $999 ($899 for education).

A solid update (especially for anyone on an M1, or especially an Intel, MacBook), with a fantastic starting price. But, as with yesterday’s iPad no-modifier, very few people are walking out the door with a sub-$1000 M4 MacBook Air—the base storage is 256GB, which I consider miserly to the point of malice—even pre-ghost Ebenezer would wince. I usually recommend at least 512GB storage for most people—1TB would be better for future-proofing—but the cost of those upgrades is bananas: $200 and $400, respectively. For some, it may be better to pick up an external SSD or two (I have a bag full of them) and deal with that (minor) hassle.

I do legit love my refurbished, 13” 16GB/1TB M2 MacBook Air in midnight, though. I originally purchased it in mid-2023 as a “travel” laptop to reduce the weight in my backpack, but it’s become my most used computer. (I’m typing on it right now!)

(Yes, refurbished. These are some of Apple’s most screamingly good deals. For one thing, the memory and storage markups are significantly reduced, which is how I managed to pick up this 1TB MacBook Air for under $950.)

I put the M-series MacBook Air near the top of the list of best computers Apple has ever made. It’s thin, light, well-priced, and more powerful than it has any right to be. It’s my number one recommendation for almost anyone looking to buy a computer. Not laptop—computer.

My only disappointment: I really do wish Apple would finally add cellular. If they’d done so here, I would’ve bought this new one instantly (rather than trying to justify the purchase with a trade-in).

A couple of days ago, Tim Cook teased that “There’s something in the Air” on X/Twitter. More about that in a bit. Today, Apple released a new iPad Air, announced via press release:

Apple today introduced the faster, more powerful iPad Air with the M3 chip and built for Apple Intelligence. iPad Air with M3 brings Apple’s advanced graphics architecture to iPad Air for the first time — taking its incredible combination of power-efficient performance and portability to a new level.

It’s a very minor spec bump (to be generous). Other than the upgraded CPU (and a 0.01 lb./2g weight reduction) very little has changed from the previous M2 generation. Notably, Apple speed-compares it against the older M1-based iPad Air, not last-gen’s M2.

The M3 brings with it hardware-accelerated ray tracing (for that undoubtedly sizable segment of iPad gamers who’ve been missing it), plus 8K HEVC, 4K H.264, ProRes and other media processing muscle for those looking to record or edit their high-end video.

It’s a classic product speed bump, especially useful if you have a non M-series iPad.

Pre-orders start today, with availability starting Wednesday, March 12.

New Magic Keyboard

Along with the upgraded iPad Air, Apple announced a new Magic Keyboard “designed for iPad Air”, and at lower prices ($269 for the 11” model, $319 for the 13”). It gains a larger trackpad and a 14-key function row, as with the Magic Keyboard for iPad Pro, but loses backlit keys and trackpad haptic feedback. The price drop had to come from somewhere, right?

The big shocker: An updated iPad (no modifier) that can’t support Apple Intelligence

An update to the iPad—that is, the entry level, $349, no modifier iPad “nothing”—was relegated to an “also” in the iPad Air release:

Apple today also updated iPad with double the starting storage and the A16 chip, bringing even more value to customers. The A16 chip provides a jump in performance for everyday tasks and experiences in iPadOS, while still providing all-day battery life. Compared to the previous generation, the updated iPad with A16 is nearly 30 percent faster.

It’s an odd announcement. Double the storage at the same $349 price and an A16 chip is nothing to sneeze at for an entry level product, except we’re living in an age of Apple Intelligence, and this update leaves the iPad no-modifier as the only iPad (indeed, the only iOS or macOS device) in Apple’s lineup incapable of supporting what Apple touts as a crucial part of their products.

When Apple released the iPad mini with an A17 Pro last October, I wrote:

It’s $349, and it’s likely Apple’s best selling iPad by far, but it can’t handle Apple Intelligence: Its A14 Bionic chip is a generation older than the one in the outgoing 6th generation iPad mini. I can’t imagine Apple would let its most popular iPad lag behind without support for Apple Intelligence, so why not update it now, in a joint press release with the iPad mini?

I was mostly pondering timing: would it come in a press release; in a (then-anticipated) October event; or perhaps a new iPad-with-no-modifiers wouldn’t be coming at all:

The final possibility is rather intriguing: What if there’s no update to the iPad-with-no-modifiers, because that iPad is going away? That leaves us with a classic Good/Better/Best scenario: iPad Mini (A17 Pro, Good), iPad Air (M2, Better), iPad Pro (M4, Best).

But would Apple drop its likely best-selling iPad to execute this strategy? I’m having a tough time believing that.

My guess: A significantly upgraded iPad is coming. M4-based is a strong possibility, but my money (today) is on an A18 or A18 Pro (likely), the same chips in the iPhone 16 and iPhone 16 Pro.

I would have been less surprised if Apple had discontinued the iPad-with-no-modifiers than I am by a non-Apple Intelligence-capable iPad.

I would have been surprised, but not shocked, by an A17 or an A17 Pro iPad no-modifier. As an entry level device, using a generation-old chip would be a clear cost-saving move. What do you expect for $349, right?

Nope. Apple couldn’t be bothered to meet even that bare minimum. Releasing a “new” iPad in 2025 that’s not Apple Intelligence-capable conveys a distinct disinterest from Apple in the iPad “nothing”. It signals an end-of-life product that’s being kept on life support for purely emotional (that is, “monetary”) reasons.

Apple is a master of market segmentation. No doubt this “update” is all about satisfying a specific segment of buyers—students and kids; kiosks and points of sale; bulk buyers, like airlines; anyone with a pre-A-series iPad who needs it for daily productivity or TV viewing. Maybe even first-time buyers upgrading from an Android device.

Let’s not ignore the all important “starting at” price anchoring. In addition to mastering market segmentation, Apple has also mastered the price ladder. The 11” is too small, you say? How about the 13”? And what’s this about Apple Intelligence?

If I were recommending a new iPad to someone today, I could not in good conscience suggest the iPad no-modifier, except in some very limited instances. My guess is unless a buyer is extremely price sensitive, they were never making out the door with a $349 iPad.

“There’s Something in the Air”

Back to the beginning. When Tim Cook teased this release with this tagline, he wrote “This week.” Not “Tuesday.” You can be certain there was no uncertainty surrounding the release of the iPad Air; that date was locked weeks ahead of the announcement.

So why “This week”? The obvious answer is another “Air” product is still to drop. There has long been speculation about an M4 MacBook Air or (much less likely) a thin new iPhone—I think more people expected a new MacBook Air than a new iPad Air today—so it’s safe to assume Wednesday will see another press release (perhaps this time with a video?).

My one hope: that the M4 MacBook Air includes Apple’s new C1 cellular chip. If that happens, I’ll immediately be in the market to replace my perfectly fine, two-year-old M2 MacBook Air. A cellular Mac would be too compelling for me to pass up.

C’mon Apple, take my money!

Brandi Buchman breaks this story for HuffPost: 

Commemorative bronze duplicates of the Congressional Gold Medal awarded to Jan. 6 police officers who defended the U.S. Capitol appear to have been removed for sale from the U.S. Mint’s website.

There’s also this apparently independent report from NBC News where the author, Ryan J. Reilly, describes the removal as:

another instance of President Donald Trump’s administration moving to take down material related to the violent episode stemming from his falsehoods about the 2020 presidential election results.

I saw this just days after I questioned if some US Mint coins this administration might deem “woke DEI” would even get minted today, so I was immediately outraged, but held off on linking to it. As tempting as it was to unleash righteous indignation on Trump for this, I didn't want my confirmation bias leading me to the wrong conclusion about a change that could have a perfectly innocuous and reasonable explanation. After all, there was only the HuffPost report (and later, the NBC one), with no indication of why or when this medal was removed. 

The why remains uncertain, but the when has a smidge more clarity: The Internet Archive’s January 9, 2025 snapshot of the US Mint’s Medals page shows an entry for “Those Who Protected the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.” I presume it’s the medal in question. That page has a “last updated on” date of November 26, 2024.

(The Medals page lists all medals available from the US Mint.)

A February 22, 2025 snapshot—with a “last updated on” date of February 5, 2025—does not list the medal.

I can therefore say with some confidence that this entry—and, I presume, the medal—was removed sometime between November 26, 2024 and February 5, 2025. That’s a pretty broad window, spanning the last months of the Biden administration and the first weeks of Trump’s.

I can also say with confidence that the only change to the page was, in fact, the removal of that one medal entry.

This is not dispositive. It’s possible the Biden administration or the US Mint decided—for completely practical, pragmatic, and uncontroversial reasons—to remove this medal from the site.

The alternative is to suggest that Donald Trump—who denied the insurrection, pardoned 1,500 rioters, purged Department of Justice prosecutors and FBI agents who worked the Jan. 6 cases, scrubbed the DOJ’s “comprehensive website cataloguing the largest criminal investigation in modern department history,” and has lied, repeatedly about Jan. 6—directed the US Mint to remove a commemorative medal “Honoring the service and sacrifice of those who protected the U.S. Capitol” on Jan. 6.

It’s quite the coin flip.

Jess Weatherbed with a fantastic review of some of the political history behind the UK’s recent attempt to backdoor the world, and Apple’s response of pulling Advanced Data Protection from their UK customers. This, especially, rings true:

Apple’s withdrawal of ADP can be interpreted as a call to break an intentionally curated silence around Britain’s bullish efforts to crush end-to-end encryption services. It’s a call that other encryption service providers don’t seem to be answering, however. Meta, Signal, and Telegram haven’t made any announcements about their own services that provide full encryption and haven’t responded to our requests to comment on the situation. Their silence and the ongoing availability of encryption features in the UK would suggest that nothing is amiss.

Thorin Klosowski, a security and privacy activist at the EFF, says that this is likely the case because the encryption services provided by most communications companies aren’t as broad as Apple’s ADP offering.

My working theory is the UK government doesn’t care (as much) about your text messages—iMessage, Signal, WhatsApp, etc. They will happily grab them if available, of course, but people understand text messages are viewable by others and are therefore more likely to either delete them or write obliquely if they’re hiding something.

No, what the UK (and other governments) really want is all the other data from Apple devices that people may not realize is being collected—locations, photos, search history for Maps and Safari, and so on—data that is accessible to Apple and governments on Standard data protection-enabled devices (via the keys that Apple holds) but which becomes inaccessible when Advanced Data Protection is enabled.

They’ll happily leave your text messages encrypted (but see the next section) if it allows them access to the truly valuable data the average person doesn’t even realize is exposed. Texting about robbing a bank is suggestive. A month’s worth of location data showing you hanging around with other suspected bank robbers, then being at the bank while it’s being robbed, along with photos from the area a week before, and a Maps search showing the fastest route from the bank—that’s actionable.

Kristen Bell opened her hosting duties at The 31st Annual Screen Actors Guild Awards (her second time) on Netflix—its second year in a row—with this delightful tune.

I do love me some Kristen Bell. She’s a legit snack. (Potential spoiler for an almost-decade old TV show.)

Samantha Cole at 404 Media provides the background behind this absurd video:

A venture capital-backed “AI performance monitoring system for factory workers” is proposing what appears to be dehumanizing surveillance of factories, where machine vision tracks workers’ hand movements and output so a boss can look at graphs and yell at them about efficiency.

In a launch video demoing the product, Baid and Mohta put on a skit showing how Optifye.ai would be used by factory bosses.

When I first watched the video, I thought it was a bone-dry satire of the kinds of anti-worker, AI-driven systems that VCs and big tech roll out in the name of “efficiencies,” and which exist mainly to induce fear in workers by convincing them they’re disposable yet utterly dependent on the good graces of their company for their continued employment.

But nah—it’s an earnest pitch for yet another exploitative, extractive, VC-backed idea.

The demo doesn’t even purport to solve any issues beyond providing ammo for yelling at workers: no explanation of the supposed inefficiency, no actionable steps for improvement—just “numbers down, must yell now.”

It’s telling that both founders come from families that run factory lines—and it shows in the video, which is overtly owner-centric, with a “management” style that treats the workers as nothing more than cogs to be adjusted for better performance.

Robert Berkvist on the tragic death of Gene Hackman and his wife, Betsy Arakawa, for the New York Times:

Gene Hackman, who never fit the mold of a Hollywood movie star but became one all the same, playing seemingly ordinary characters with deceptive subtlety, intensity and often charm in some of the most noted films of the 1970s and '80s, has died, the authorities in New Mexico said on Thursday. He was 95.

Mr. Hackman and his wife were found dead on Wednesday afternoon at the home in Santa Fe., N.M., where they had been living, according to a statement from the Santa Fe County Sheriff's Department. The cause of death was unclear and under investigation. Sheriff's deputies found the bodies of Mr. Hackman; his wife, Betsy Arakawa; and a dog, according to the statement, which said that foul play was not suspected.

It’s one level of grief when a celebrity with the stature of Gene Hackman dies. It’s even more tragic when a loved one dies too.

When I learned of Hackman’s death, two movies came immediately to mind: Superman^[1] and Enemy of the State. Probably not the first two films most people think of, but I came late to most of his work.

Hackman, it turns out, was a significant part of my classic films self-education—movies released “before my time”—but I didn’t realize as I watched them that they were Hackman classics; they were just classics: The French Connection, The Poseidon Adventure, even Young Frankenstein (which, until now, I never realized he was in).

(I saw The Royal Tenenbaums, but that movie occupies the “WTF did I just watch” spot in my brain, so I don’t recall most of it.)

Most of his other iconic movies—Bonnie and Clyde, Hoosiers, Mississippi Burning—remain on my “to watch” list.

That list will be getting a workout over the next few weeks.

The trailer for this new documentary film from Apple TV+ just dropped, and looks to be an inspirational journey:

With unprecedented access and candid interviews, “Number One on the Call Sheet” takes us on an intimate journey with some of Hollywood’s most extraordinary leading Black men and women as they shine a light on the joys and challenges of being a Black actor, share breakthrough moments, discuss blueprints for success and honor legends, while recognizing the next generation’s enormous potential.

It’s a two-parter, one focusing on “Black Leading Women in Hollywood” (directed by Shola Lynch), the other on “Black Leading Men in Hollywood” (directed by Reginald Hudlin) who are, in fact, number one on the call sheet—

A Hollywood term for the lead actor or actress of a film listed first on the daily schedule.

Also, a term of status.

I had no idea status was attached to the top slot of a call sheet, though I understand how rare it is for that slot—usually the lead of the movie—to be held by a Black performer.

It’s a prodigious assembly of extraordinary artists, and the trailer tells me the stories will be funny, inspiring, and unforgettable.

Number One on the Call Sheet is the culmination of four years of work and streams on March 28 on Apple TV+.

Awful news today (via Variety):

She was found unconscious and unresponsive Wednesday in her Manhattan apartment, according to the New York City police department. According to the New York Post, which first reported the news, she had recently undergone a liver transplant. Trachtenberg’s cause of death has not been confirmed, but the NYPD said criminality was not suspected.

I’m heartbroken. I loved her in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. She was a crucial part of what made Season 5 special. She was the perfect “annoying little sister” while remaining deeply charming and lovable. Her introduction in that season may be the most successful execution of a Cousin Oliver. Like many fans, I consider the season to be one of the show’s strongest, due in large part to her character and her ebullient performance. Perhaps because of that character, I’ve always felt she was an old soul. At 39, she’s left us far too soon.

Tributes are starting to pour in from her coworkers, and they’re agonizing.

As I explored the American Innovation $1 Coin site for my aforelinked Steve Jobs piece, I came across several interesting—even inspiring—coins:

• Arkansas: Features “Raye Montague visualizing a United States Navy Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate, a ship she designed by computer.”
• South Carolina: Features “Educator and activist Septima Poinsette Clark […] called the ‘Mother of the Civil Rights Movement’” with a design depicting her “with three African American students carrying books and an American flag, representing that education and literacy are necessary for empowerment and enjoyment of civil rights.”
• Pennsylvania: “Focuses on the extraordinary work of Dr. Jonas Salk and his team at the University of Pittsburgh in the discovery of the polio vaccine.”
• Massachusetts: Honors Alexander Graham Bell’s “tele-phone” and “depicts the dial of an early rotary dial telephone.”

A Black female naval engineer, a Black female Civil Rights leader, a Jewish scientist who developed vaccines, and an immigrant. How many of these innovators would be decried by this regime as “woke DEI”.

Would any of these coins be minted today?

The State of California’s News (press release):

For California’s American Innovation Coin, Governor Gavin Newsom has recommended world-renowned innovator Steve Jobs. The coin, which will be minted by the U.S. Mint, highlights California’s legacy as a global hub of innovation.

The American Innovation $1 Coin Program, launched in 2018 by the U.S. Mint, celebrates the spirit of ingenuity that defines America. Each state, territory, and the District of Columbia is honored with creating a unique coin recognizing an innovation or innovator from their region.

I applaud the selection, but I wasn’t familiar with the American Innovation $1 Coin Program, so I wasn’t sure what to expect. A perusal suggests most coins depict innovations closely associated with an individual, with designs focused on the innovation, not the person.

Governor Newsom is quoted:

Innovation and California are synonymous, and Steve Jobs encapsulates the unique brand of innovation that California runs on: innovation not driven by business alone, but as a vehicle to forever change the world.

I imagined an image of Steve, surrounded by representations of his innovations: the Apple II, Macintosh, and iPhone; or perhaps a menu bar, mouse and pointer, or (dare I hope?) Clarus the Dogcow.

That does not appear to be the plan for this coin, according to The Mercury News:

The designed (sic) preferred by the governor’s office and Jobs’ family pictured a younger Jobs sitting cross-legged amid a California landscape with oak trees and rolling hills, along with the inscription “Make Something Wonderful.” Myers said that image better conveyed Jobs’ love of California nature, which was an important part of who he was. Other designs incorporated Jobs’ image with circuit designs and keyboards and one just featured his name with a tree growing circuit-like branches.

OK… more of a “California inspires innovation” vibe, with Steve as one of California’s most recognizable innovators, I guess?

But the committee opted to recommend a design with a more familiar image of Jobs — older and wearing glasses and his trademark black turtleneck. The design — which isn’t final and could be altered before the coin is minted in 2026 — is fittingly simple and elegant.

A silhouette of Steve in glasses and turtleneck makes sense; it’s probably the most recognizable version of him.

But to represent just Steve feels misguided. The press release includes this passage:

By focusing on who he was innovating for – other people – Jobs was able to use technology to connect people to each other and to the broader world, bringing people onto the same level by providing them with equal access. And that approach was built on a willingness to try new ideas and push the boundaries of what was possible – an approach that embodies the California spirit.

A singular image of Steve does not suggest using “technology to connect people.” It focuses too much on the man, not his work.

Compare this proposed design to coins from Arkansas, Pennsylvania, or the especially evocative “tele-phone” design from Massachusetts. Each celebrates the person through their innovation.

Since the design remains subject to alteration prior to minting, I hope a more compelling design is created. As it is, they chose the right man, but the wrong imagery.

Giovanni Russonello for the New York Times on Roberta Flack’s resplendent voice:

Critics often struggled to describe the understated strength of her voice, and the breadth of her stylistic range. In its poise, its interiority and conviction, its lack of sentimentality or overstatement, her singing seemed to press the reset button on any standard expectations of a pop star. She placed equal priority on passion and clear communication—like an instructor speaking to an inquisitive student, or a lover pledging devotion.

“I’ve been told I sound like Nina Simone, Nancy Wilson, Odetta, Barbra Streisand, Dionne Warwick, even Mahalia Jackson,” Ms. Flack told The New York Times in 1970. “If everybody said I sounded like one person, I’d worry. But when they say I sound like them all, I know I’ve got my own style.”

Where Is the Love is a gorgeous jewel of a song, while Killing Me Softly With His Song remains an indelible part of my ’70s soundtrack. (Though I now can’t hear the opening phrasing without the Fugees’ sitar interlude^[1] popping in. Their cover is a testimonial to the song’s staying power.)

I wasn’t aware Flack was also a gifted and classically trained pianist:

Sitting on her mother Irene’s lap while Irene played piano and organ at their Methodist church, Flack began to tinker herself, then to properly play, demonstrating a prodigy-grade prowess as a young child that those around her clambered to support.

A Sunday-school teacher paid for Flack to take lessons. Flack’s father, Laron, brought home a ramshackle upright piano from a junkyard, which the family restored and painted green. By age 9, Flack was playing Chopin nocturnes, crying at the keyboard because the music moved her so powerfully. At 13, she accompanied her church’s choir on Handel’s “Messiah.” […]

At the time, America didn’t necessarily expect a Black child to master Verdi or Bach, and wasn’t always open to having its expectations upended. Flack would often recall skillfully performing a Scarlatti sonata in a statewide competition as a teenager, only to come in second in the segregated “Negro division”; Scarlatti, she gathered, wasn’t what the judges wanted from someone like her.

(From Jon Mooallem’s piece in The Wall Street Journal (Apple News+), which opens with a stunningly emotive lede.)

The New York Times piece has more on that competition:

At 13, Ms. Flack won second place in a statewide competition for Black students after performing a Scarlatti sonata; she was convinced that she had deserved the main prize and that the judges were thrown off by the sight of a Black girl playing classical music with such command. Just two years later, she entered Howard University on a full scholarship. She became the first undergraduate vocal student to give a public recital in classical vocal literature, and she conducted a student production of “Aida” that drew a standing ovation from Howard’s music faculty.

But a dean warned that the opportunities in classical orchestras would be scarce for a Black woman, advising Ms. Flack to pursue a teaching career. Upon graduating, she started working toward a master’s degree in music education.

A mixture of reactions here: delighted we were blessed with her voice; disappointed that we missed out on her classical piano virtuosity; disquieted the dean was almost certainly right in their assessment then; and disheartened that assessment may remain valid today.

Flack died of cardiac arrest, and was diagnosed with ALS in 2022. My usual donations to American Heart Association and ALS Association will be supplemented today in her honor.

Apple Newsroom:

Apple will spend more than $500 billion in the U.S. over the next four years

Apple today announced its largest-ever spend commitment, with plans to spend and invest more than $500 billion in the U.S. over the next four years. This new pledge builds on Apple’s long history of investing in American innovation and advanced high-skilled manufacturing, and will support a wide range of initiatives that focus on artificial intelligence, silicon engineering, and skills development for students and workers across the country.

My immediate thought upon seeing Apple’s headline: How much of this is actually new, rather than a repackaging of existing plans? 

Dan Gallagher for The Wall Street Journal (News+):

Apple’s $500 Billion U.S. Investment Is Mostly Already in the Books

Unclear, though, is how much of the planned spending is actually new. Apple has spent about $1.1 trillion over the past four fiscal years on total operating expenses and capital expenditures—and Wall Street expects nearly $1.3 trillion in total spending over the next four years, according to consensus estimates by Visible Alpha. While Apple doesn’t break out its expenses per geography, about 43% of its revenue comes from the Americas region, which it defines as North and South America. Assuming the U.S. constitutes the large bulk of that number, and if spending is about in line with revenue, then a rough figure of 40% of projected global spending through the 2028 fiscal year equates to about $505 billion.

In short, Apple’s announced figure is in line with what one might expect the company to be spending anyway, given its financials. 

I don’t know that Apple announced this only for the benefit of Trump, but Trump, of course, claimed credit:

There is also domestic politics to consider—no small matter for a U.S. consumer-electronics company that still builds the bulk of its products overseas. Indeed the announcement seems to have already paid off: “Thank you Tim Cook and Apple!!!” President Trump exclaimed on his Truth Social platform Monday morning. 

The full post reads (in all caps, naturally, complete with a typo and three exclamation marks):

APPLE HAS JUST ANNOUNCED A RECORD 500 BILLION DOLLAR INVESTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THE REASON, FAITH IN WHAT WE ARE DOING, WITHOUT WHICH, THEY WOULD’NT BE INVESTING TEN CENTS. THANK YOU TIM COOK AND APPLE!!!

Also on Truth Social, Trump released a graphic touting Apple’s $500 Billion commitment as part of “Investments in the U.S. Under President Trump”.

To quote myself on Mastodon in early February: 

Everyone: We’re Doing The Thing.

Trump: I will SEEK VENGENCE upon anyone not Doing The Thing!

Everyone: After speaking with Trump, we’ve agreed to Do The Thing.

Trump: Thanks to me and me alone, everyone is now Doing The Thing. You’re welcome.

Everyone: 😶

There’s no reason to believe Apple’s announcement today had anything to do with Trump or that it would have been any different under another administration—except that this administration is deeply, corruptly transactional and rewards behavior that demonstrates fealty.

Back to Apple’s announcement:

As part of its new U.S. investments, Apple will work with manufacturing partners to begin production of servers in Houston later this year. A 250,000-square-foot server manufacturing facility, slated to open in 2026, will create thousands of jobs.

Previously manufactured outside the U.S., the servers that will soon be assembled in Houston play a key role in powering Apple Intelligence, and are the foundation of Private Cloud Compute, which combines powerful AI processing with the most advanced security architecture ever deployed at scale for AI cloud computing. The servers bring together years of R&D by Apple engineers, and deliver the industry-leading security and performance of Apple silicon to the data center.

It’s a tantalizing tidbit that the servers being built in this new facility are for Private Cloud Compute, hardware Apple doesn’t even sell. Obviously very important to Apple’s AI plans, but I’m surprised they’re important (unique?) enough to require a dedicated facility. I’m very curious to see what these servers might look like. (Honestly, a rack-mountable M4 Max relaunch of the Xserve—Apple Server?—would be dope.)

One final thought, on Apple’s hiring plans:

In the next four years, Apple plans to hire around 20,000 people, of which the vast majority will be focused on R&D, silicon engineering, software development, and AI and machine learning. The expanded commitment includes significant investment in Apple’s R&D hubs across the country. This includes growing teams across the U.S. focused on areas including custom silicon, hardware engineering, software development, artificial intelligence, and machine learning.

This is deftly worded. It specifies how many people it plans to hire, but doesn’t state if it’s additional or replacement headcount. If 20,000 people leave, and 20,000 people are hired to replace them, will Apple claim success on its hiring plan? It does meet the letter, if not the spirit, of the statement. Likewise, it plans on “growing” specific teams, but says nothing about “shrinking” others to balance things out.

Quite the facility with language, Apple has.

Jonathan Vanian at CNBC has this vile development from Meta:

The company said in a corporate filing Thursday that it had approved "an increase in the target bonus percentage" for its annual bonus plan for executives. Meta's named executive officers could earn a bonus of 200% of their base salary under the new plan, up from the 75% they earned previously, according to the filing.

And:

The disclosure of the new executive bonus plan comes a week after Meta began laying off 5% of its overall workforce. The company had previously said this would impact its lowest performers.

Meta also slashed its annual distribution of stock options by about 10% for thousands of employees, according to a report published Thursday by the Financial Times.

The people at the top get richer, the people who do the work get screwed—or worse.

As I said, vile.

Yours truly, with some context-free snarking on Mastodon three weeks ago:

“The following app has been approved for distribution.”

changing to

“The following app has completed Notarization.”

in 3… 2…

The language was indeed changed, per Riley Testut, who sparked the controversy in the first place:

The following app is ready for distribution.

From “has been approved” to “is ready.” Damn, I should have thought of that one—Apple doesn’t waste words.

(For context, as I neglected to link to it here at the time, see TechCrunch’s story about the (EU-only) release of the first native iOS porn app, Hot Tub. The short-short version: Apple was not happy with the app being marketed as “The First Apple-Approved Porn App” because, in their mind, they had merely “approved” it in the this-has-passed-our-minimal-review-process sense, not in the we-think-this-is-acceptable sense.)

I’m sure Phil sleeps better now.

Xcode 16.2 Release Notes:

Starting with Xcode 16.2, Xcode can add support for new hardware without needing to update the entire Xcode app. Xcode will check when launching the app if a hardware support update is available and will install it. For the equivalent from the command-line, run xcodebuild -runFirstLaunch -checkForNewerComponents.

When there is hardware support available, the installer package will be stored in ~/Library/Developer/Packages, and can be copied for installation and setup purposes for other machines. (138789379)

I vaguely recall seeing mention of this somewhere, but I wasn’t sure it was new, or something I missed from the iPad mini introduction (or earlier). A little birdie tells me it was quietly snuck into Xcode 16.2 in anticipation of the iPhone 16e release.

This will be a massive saving of bandwidth, time, and money. Prior to this feature, every new device Apple released (three to five release cycles a year) required a full Xcode download to support it—a weighty proposition.

Like many of us, as Xcode matured it gained a bit of extra weight each year. An extra SDK or two here, a large serving of simulators there, and before you know it, you’re the heaviest you’ve ever been—10.98GB in Xcode 12.5.1! What happened to the svelte 915MB Xcode 2.3?

In recent years, that initial download was often well over 7GB, even though the actual differences between versions was relatively tiny. It was a real impediment for developers.

Fortunately the Xcode team recognized this and put Xcode on a restrictive diet. They pruned the default install of SDKs and simulators, moving them into optional downloads. That shrank Xcode’s initial install down to a robust-but-healthy 3.01GB today.

This alone is a fantastic improvement worthy of praise, but it still meant downloading 3+GB every time Apple released a new iPhone or iPad or Mac.

This new feature reduces that download to 46.8MB.

Astounding.

I have several friends who work (or worked) on Xcode and related tools, and I’m very proud of them for shrinking it back down to a manageable size over the last few years.

I’m especially in awe of what was surely an extensive cross-functional effort that went into building, testing, and quietly releasing this new feature in a public release of Xcode (all the while crossing their fingers that folks like Steve Troughton-Smith didn’t notice it ahead of time, I presume!).

My heartfelt congrats to the teams!

Allow me to claim a tiny sliver of credit here. In 2020, Xcode 12 weighed in between 9GB and 11GB. It was the height of the pandemic—and also in the midst of worldwide protests over the murder of George Floyd . I was talking with a lot of developers who suddenly found themselves working from home on slow, bandwidth-constrained connections, often with overage charges—assuming they even had home internet. It was in that environment that I wrote a bug entitled “Xcode and OS downloads are extraordinarily large, impacting less privileged developers.”

I don’t recall exactly what I wrote. I was probably quite overwrought. I may have suggested alternative distribution methods (like Apple Stores). My bug (rdar://66608319 for those still on the inside!) wasn’t the only—or even the first—bug to raise the issue, but it resonated with a few well-placed folks, acting as a small extra bit of motivation over the years for some of the people focused on making Xcode installs smaller. I’m gratified that it was part of a larger push to eliminate barriers to developing on Apple platforms. Small acts can have big impacts.

Paul Kunert for The Register, on Thursday:

HP Inc is trying to force consumer PC and print customers to use online and other digital support channels by setting a minimum 15-minute wait time for anyone that phones the call center to get answers to troublesome queries. […]

At the beginning of a call to telephone support, a message will be played stating: “We are experiencing longer waiting times and we apologize for the inconvenience. The next available representative will be with you in about 15 minutes.

“To quickly resolve your issue, please visit our website support.hp.com to check out other support options or find helpful articles and assistant to get a guided help by visiting virtualagent.hpcloud.hp.com.”

Paul Kunert for The Register, on Friday:

HP Inc today abruptly ditched the mandatory 15-minute wait time that it imposed on customers dialling up its telephone-based support team due to “initial feedback.” […]

It went down like a lead balloon internally at HP, with some staff on the front line unhappy that they were having to deal with a decision taken by management, who didn’t have to directly interact with customers left hanging on the telephone… for at least 15 minutes.

Now HP has abandoned the policy […]

Imagine being so tone-deaf as a company that you force your already frustrated customers to unnecessarily wait for help, as a way of foisting them off to online “self-solve” options (which, I’m guessing, many had already tried—and which failed to help).

Perhaps HP was trying to save a few ducats to cover their recent acquisition.