Quite unexpectedly, I have been deluged with inquiries from around the globe about how the Lost Books of Quatria and the tales contained therein came into my possession. While I wish I could take full credit, I must admit that I was not the first to find the hidden way back to Quatria. It was, in fact, revealed to me via a 100 year old mystery, which in many ways is equally, if not more curious than that ancient lost world itself.
In 1916, a German U-boat sank a merchant marine ship flying Allied colors off the coast of Antarctica, somewhere between Elephant Island and Deception Island in the South Shetland Archipelago. It was believed that all souls aboard the ship had been lost, along with its cargo of food and medical supplies bound for the Western front. That is, until a lone survivor was recovered some two years later in 1918 on an unnamed tidal island just off the north-west coast of the Antarctic Peninsula. …
Dear Ms. Margaret E. Atwood,
I’m a young Canadian writer with a problem, and perhaps it’s something you’d be willing to take a look at. I noticed an article of yours here on Medium about mentoring young writers (from 2015), and the need for providing “cultural infrastructure” to help one another succeed.
I made a Twitter thread explaining the full context of the situation, and included a perhaps TMI level of detail at the link below.
Without rehashing the entire thing, here’s a quick summary:
Some product feedback in no particular order. (cc: Ev Williams)
.is getting inserted automatically somehow between the title & subtitle.
While Americans are exclusively focused on which old white guy they want to rule them, I’d like to offer for posterity a modest proposal: abolish the executive branch entirely.
I know, I know, your sacred Constitution blah blah blah.
But hear me out: if there’s one thing we’ve learned over the past four years, is that there is too much power concentrated in the Executive branch. And until it is completely dismantled, and the White House turned into a wax museum, we are just going to see this same cycle repeat infinitely. …
Whatever happens on Election Day 2020 in the United States, and after, it seems unlikely that we’re all going to end up living together in the same singular consensus reality.
Perhaps we’re already not all living in the same reality (especially those of us outside the US, who most certainly are not), but no matter what the outcome is, we’re almost certainly headed for what cryptocurrency people already know of as a “hard fork.”
As the venerable Investopedia explains:
“A hard fork (or hardfork), as it relates to blockchain technology, is a radical change to a network’s protocol that makes previously invalid blocks and transactions valid, or vice-versa. … Nodes of the newest version of a blockchain no longer accept the older version(s) of the blockchain; which creates a permanent divergence from the previous version of the blockchain… One path follows the new, upgraded blockchain, and the other path continues along the old path. Generally, after a short time, those on the old chain will realize that their version of the blockchain is outdated or irrelevant and quickly upgrade to the latest version.” …
Back in the early 2000’s, I experimented on eBay selling “intangible experiences.” I don’t remember much of the details nearly 20 years later, but I remember I sold a few before eBay shut it down as a rules violation.
The world just wasn’t ready.
Now that we live in crypto-future-land, though, it’s starting to look like the world is very much ready for intangible digital ownership.
Enter NFTs, or non-fungible tokens. NFTs are touted as being the basis for the emerging “digital collectible” market, and come in a few different flavors technically (depending on which Ethereum ERC version number they represent — but I won’t go into that here, try this). Suffice it to say, each NFT is a unique “thing,” which is what makes it “non-fungible” — it can’t necessarily be exchanged 1:1 with another unit. …
There has been a great deal of press this week regarding Pope Francis’ declaration in a documentary endorsing civil unions for gay couples.
Some are calling it an “important step,” which in one sense may be true — i.e., in the sense of gradually updating a hopelessly out of date institution. In another sense, however, this whole thing is a bit of a smokescreen.
To explain why I think so (apart from the fact that LGBT people have been struggling in the US for civil union rights at least since the 1970's — making this not “new” at all), let’s first look at what Francis is quoted as having said, via…