For the last year and a half, the story of FTX has focused largely on the crimes and punishment of Sam Bankman-Fried. But in the background, the actual customers he left behind have been caught in a financial feeding frenzy over the remains of the company.

On today's show, we do a deep dive into the anatomy of the FTX bankruptcy. We meet the vulture investors who make markets out of risky debt, and hear how customers fare in the secretive world of bankruptcy claims trading.

This episode was hosted by Alexi Horowitz-Ghazi and Amanda Aronczyk. It was produced by James Sneed and Sam Yellowhorse Kesler. It was edited by Jess Jiang, and fact-checked by Sierra Juarez. It was engineered by Cena Loffredo. Alex Goldmark is Planet Money's executive producer.

Help support Planet Money and get bonus episodes by subscribing to Planet Money+ in Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org/planetmoney.

In brief: Monday will yield an absolutely splendid day of weather in Houston. Like, it will be one of the top 10 nicest days of the year. Tuesday will also see a modicum of drier air before a warmer, southerly flow takes ahold. The weekend will see highs in the upper 80s with strong southerly winds, but rain chances will probably hold off until at least next Monday.

Monday

Do you like dry air, mild temperatures, clear skies, and light winds? Because today checks all of those boxes. After a pleasantly cool start in the 50s, temperatures will reach the lower- to mid-70s this afternoon with light winds. Skies should be mostly sunny, albeit with a few clouds this afternoon. With dewpoints in the 40s, the air will feel plenty dry.

In my humble opinion, this is just about the finest weather one could have—but such things never last. Those light northeast winds will shift to come from the southeast later today, and while we won’t feel the influence of that right away, it will set into motion a prolonged period of a southerly flow, and set the stage for a much warmer pattern later this week. Lows will still get into the mid-50s tonight in Houston, with cooler conditions inland.

Tuesday

This will be a bit of a transition day, as humid air begins to replace dry air, but the swap is not yet complete. Skies will be mostly sunny, with highs near 80 degrees. Winds will be from the south at 5 to 10 mph. With the influence of the southerly flow, lows on Tuesday night will be considerably warmer, in the mid- to upper-60s.

Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday

This will be a trio of modestly warm days, with highs in the low- to mid-80s. We’ll see a mix of sunshine and clouds each day, although each successive day should see more cloud cover and less clear sky. Nights will drop to around 70 degrees, give or take, with decent amount of humidity. Winds will consistently blow from the south, increasing in velocity toward the end of the week when we may see sustained winds of 20 mph, with gusts of 30 mph.

Saturday and Sunday

Those winds will persist into the weekend. We’ll see this deepening southerly flow over the region due to a potent low pressure system over the central United States. This gives us a fair amount of confidence in the forecast for this weekend, and it’s a warm and windy one. If you’re participating in the Texas Bike MS 150 (Saturday and Sunday) or IRONMAN Texas event (Saturday), you can expect temperatures in the upper-80s, generally. Skies should be partly sunny. Both days will see strong south-southeasterly winds, blowing at perhaps 20 mph, with gusts up to 30 mph—so generally a pretty amazing tail wind for bike riders. Rain chances also look low, to non-existent through most of the weekend.

Next week

By Monday we may begin to see something of a pattern change, with slightly better rain chances entering the forecast. While I can’t rule out some kind of front working its way into Houston, right now the most likely scenario is continued warm weather in the upper 80s for much of next week.

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

A reader writes:

I work in a low-level supervisory role for a social service agency. Most of our employees work remotely and are issued desktop computers with a monitor and camera. The majority of these remote employees do not need to be on camera to complete daily tasks; however, when meetings or training sessions occur, “cameras on” is expected.

Recently, I set up a Teams meeting with an employee of seven months’ tenure (“Wynn”) to train them one-on-one for an additional task. As background, Wynn has exhibited some lack of conformity with business norms, including timeliness of response, reliability, and accepting feedback without excuses. This is not a first job for Wynn. I do not have authority to decide what responsibilities Wynn is given or if they require a performance improvement plan. None of their issues has reached “fireable offense” level yet, but they are a long way from being a model employee.

Wynn had some technical issues with connectivity at the beginning of the meeting. Due to that, I said we could continue with our training without requiring them to use their camera. However, Wynn was eventually able to connect their camera.

Once the camera came on, I could see that Wynn was in bed, not propped up on pillows but lying on their belly looking up at the camera. The top of the bed was fully visible and they did not use the blur feature. Throughout the call, Wynn fidgeted and moved all over the bed; sometimes on their belly, laying their side, sitting up, sitting slightly off camera, playing with their hair, face, and clothing, smoking, etc. While I understand everyone has a different tolerance for staying still, it was constant motion. I was also surprised to see Wynn smoking in a training meeting with a supervisor. They did not take notes and the meeting was not recorded.

I conducted the meeting, saying nothing about Wynn’s movements; however, when they moved off of screen I did ask if everything was okay. The level of visual distraction was high and I felt somewhat like I was intruding on their privacy as they were in bed. I would have no objection to seeing a bed in the background, or even part of a headboard or pillow to support the back, but their sprawl on the bed seemed like too much informality or familiarity for a meeting held with a supervisor. To be fair to Wynn, they seemed engaged in the training, answering and asking questions appropriately.

If this meeting included others, should I have handled things differently? What if an external stakeholder or upper management was on the call too? I am struggling with whether or not to handle this as a coaching on professional norms opportunity, but have not been told if this individual might have a medical accommodation allowing them to recline in bed while they work. Am I allowed to ask my manager that question? Also, one would not smoke in a meeting on-site, and it strikes me as somewhat casual to do when you are being trained, even if one is at home.

Was ignoring Wynn’s movements the best option? I admit to a bias in that I find it unprofessional to show so much of one’s bed and smoke when you are working but do not know if they have always done this in meetings with others in supervisory roles and it’s not been raised as an issue.

Yeah, you don’t take work calls lying on your stomach in bed unless there’s something medical going on and you have some kind of accommodation (which doesn’t have to be formal; it could just be, “FYI, I’m having a medical thing and this is the only way I can comfortably take the call, hope it’s not too distracting”).

You also don’t turn your camera on for a work call if you’re going to need to be moving around like that! It’s distracting to whoever else is on the call.

The smoking is weird too. If it were just the smoking, I’d let it go — it’s unprofessional, but it doesn’t sound like you’re Wynn’s direct manager so you could just let that go … but combined with everything else, it’s part of an overall impression of Not In Work Mode.

We can debate whether or not that should be the case. If we were creating a brand new work culture from scratch, hell, I might be an avid proponent of all calls being taken from bed and people not caring about things like smoking as long as they don’t have to smell or inhale it. But we have the culture we have, and it has conventions and norms, and the reality is that smoking on a call from bed while you wriggle around and slouch off camera and play with your hair is as out of step with those norms as, say, coming to work shirtless or, I don’t know, working from a blanket fort.

As for what you could have done in the moment … it would have been fine to say, “I’m finding so much movement distracting, can I ask you to not to do that on camera / would you rather reschedule for another time?” or just suggest they turn their camera back off if that would be appropriate for the context.

As for what to do now … especially given the other issues you’ve noticed with Wynn’s professionalism, it would be fine to mention this to their manager and say something like, “If it happens again, my thought is to say something but before I do, I wanted to make sure there’s not an accommodation in play that I should be aware of.”

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

A reader writes:

A couple years ago, I managed an employee who was arrested at work for stealing from a former employer, among other charges. She was put in jail for a considerable amount of time.

She is apparently now out, because I received her resume. I’m no longer at the previous company. I did not consider her, but I noticed that the start date she listed with the company where I managed her precedes the date the company even opened (I imagine to cover her employment when she was working for the company she stole from) and extends a few months from the time she left for jail.

Her resume lists no employer contacts or references. A friend noticed my former company on the resume and called me to find out what I knew. The field I work in is fairly small and I anticipate more calls like this. What is the appropriate response? Do I say simply she would not be eligible for rehire? Do I mention that I have seen her resume and it is not entirely accurate? Do I mention that I saw her arrested for theft from her employer or even tell them to make sure they do background checks?

I answer this question — and two others — over at Inc. today, where I’m revisiting letters that have been buried in the archives here from years ago (and sometimes updating/expanding my answers to them). You can read it here.

Other questions I’m answering there today include:

• Should you let someone know you’re reporting them to their manager?
• Can I ghost my former colleague?

New Cyanide and Happiness Comic

JERSEY CITY—Lurking ominously as her unsuspecting prey lay naked with his clothes strewn at the foot of the bed, local man Greg Jensen’s girlfriend peeked up over his torso during a blow job Monday like a gator in the bayou. According to terrified sources, Jensen’s girlfriend, much like an amphibious killer roaming…

Read more...

Lumen, the company that supports 911 some emergency call services, stated that the outages in Nevada, South Dakota, and Nebraska that left callers unanswered were caused by a “fiber cut” during the installation of a light pole. What do you think?

Read more...

New comic!
Today's News:

Half the sassy teens in my army are going into battle wearing shorts -- armor is clearly more of a fashion statement than a functional necessity.

Click here to go see the bonus panel!

Hovertext:
Look it's the only test with no false negatives.

Today's News:

Today's links

• Paying for it doesn't make it a market: But competition does.
• Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
• This day in history: 2009, 2014, 2019, 2023
• Upcoming appearances: Where to find me.
• Recent appearances: Where I've been.
• Latest books: You keep readin' em, I'll keep writin' 'em.
• Upcoming books: Like I said, I'll keep writin' 'em.
• Colophon: All the rest.

---

Paying for it doesn't make it a market (permalink)

Anyone who says "If you're not paying for the product, you're the product" has been suckered in by Big Tech, whose cargo-cult version of markets and the discipline they impose on companies.

Here's the way that story goes: companies that fear losing your business will treat you better, because treating you worse will cost them money. Since ad-supported media gets paid by advertisers, they are fine with abusing you to make advertisers happy, because the advertiser is the customer, and you are the product.

This represents a profound misunderstanding of how even capitalism's champions describe its workings. The purported virtue of capitalism is that it transforms the capitalist's greed into something of broad public value, by appealing to the capitalist's fear. A successful capitalist isn't merely someone figures out how to please their customers – they're also someone who figures out how to please their suppliers.

That's why tech platforms were – until recently – very good to (some of) their workforce. Technical labor was scarce and so platforms built whimsical "campuses" for tech workers, with amenities ranging from stock options to gourmet cafeterias to egg-freezing services for those workers planning to stay at their desks through their fertile years. Those workers weren't the "customer" – but they were treated better than any advertiser or user.

But when it came to easily replaced labor – testers, cleaning crew, the staff in those fancy cafeterias – the situation was much worse. Those workers were hired through cut-out shell companies, denied benefits, even made to enter via separate entrances on shifts that were scheduled to minimize the chance that they would ever interact with one of the highly paid tech workers at the firm.

Likewise, advertisers may be the tech companies' "customers" but that doesn't mean the platforms treat them well. Advertisers get ripped off just like the rest of us. The platforms gouge them on price, lie to them about advertising reach, and collude with one another to fix prices and defraud advertisers:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/10/05/florida-man/#wannamakers-ghost

Now, it's true that the advertisers used to get a good deal from the platforms, and that it came at the expense of the users. Facebook lured in users by falsely promising never to spy on them. Then, once the users were locked in, Facebook flipped a switch, started spying on users from asshole to appetite, and then offered rock-bottom-priced, fine-grained, highly reliable ad-targeting to advertisers:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3247362

But once those advertisers were locked in, Facebook turned on them, too. Of course they did. The point of monopoly power isn't just getting too big to fail and too big to jail – it's getting too big to care:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/04/teach-me-how-to-shruggie/#kagi

This is the thing that "if you're not paying for the product, you're the product" fails to comprehend. "If you're not paying for the product" is grounded in a cartoonish vision of markets in which "the customer is king" and successful businesses are those who cater to their customers – even at the expense of their workers and suppliers – will succeed.

In this frame, the advertiser is the platforms' customer, the customer is king, the platform inflicts unlimited harm upon all other stakeholders in service to those advertisers, the advertisers are so pleased with this white-glove service that they willingly pay a handsome premium to use the platform, and so the platform grows unimaginably wealthy.

But of course, if the platforms inflict unlimited harms upon their users, those users will depart, and then no amount of obsequious catering to advertisers will convince them to spend money on ads that no one sees. In the cargo-cult conception of platform capitalism, the platforms are able to solve this problem by "hacking our dopamine loops" – depriving us of our free will with "addictive" technologies that keep us locked to their platforms even when they grow so terrible that we all hate using them.

This means that we can divide the platform economy into "capitalists" who sell you things, and "surveillance capitalists" who use surveillance data to control your mind, then sell your compulsive use of their products to their cherished customers, the advertisers.

Surveillance capitalists like Google are thus said to have only been shamming when they offered us a high-quality product. That was just a means to an end: the good service Google offered in its golden age was just bait to trick us into handing over enough surveillance data that they could tune their mind-control technology, strip us of our free will, and then sell us to their beloved advertisers, for whom nothing is too good.

Meanwhile, the traditional capitalists – the companies that sell you things – are the good capitalists. Apple and Microsoft are disciplined by market dynamics. They won't spy on you because you're their customer, and so they have to keep you happy.

All this leads to an inexorable conclusion: unless we pay for things with money, we are doomed. Any attempt to pay with attention will end in a free-for-all where the platforms use their Big Data mind-control rays to drain us of all our attention. It is only when we pay with money that we can dicker over price and arrive at a fair and freely chosen offer.

This theory is great for tech companies: it elevates giving them money to a democracy-preserving virtue. It reframes handing your cash over to a multi-trillion dollar tech monopolist as good civics. It's easy to see why those tech giants would like that story, but boy, are you a sap if you buy it.

Because all capitalists are surveillance capitalists…when they can get away with it. Sure, Apple blocked Facebook from spying on Ios users…and then started illegally, secretly spying on those users and lying about it, in order to target ads to those users:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/14/luxury-surveillance/#liar-liar

And Microsoft spies on every Office 365 user and rats them out to their bosses ("Marge, this analytics dashboard says you're the division's eleventh-worst speller and twelfth-worst typist. Shape up or ship out!"). But the joke's on your boss: Microsoft also spies on their whole company and sells the data about it to their competitors:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/11/25/the-peoples-amazon/#clippys-revengel

The platforms screw anyone they can. Sure, they lured in advertisers with good treatment, but once those advertisers were locked in, they fucked them over just as surely as they fucked over their users.

The surveillance capitalism hypothesis depends on the existence of a hypothetical – and wildly improbably – Big Data mind-control technology that keeps users locked to platforms even when the platform decays. Mind-control rays are an extraordinary claim supported by the thinnest of evidence (marketing materials from the companies as they seek to justify charging a premium to advertisers, combined with the self-serving humblebrags of millionaire Prodigal Tech Bros who claim to have awakened to the evil of using their dopamine-hacking sorcerous powers on behalf of their billionaire employers).

There is a much simpler explanation for why users stay on platforms even as they decline in quality: they are enmeshed in a social service that encompasses their friends, loved ones, customers, and communities. Even if everyone in this sprawling set of interlocking communities agrees that the platform is terrible, they will struggle to agree on what to do about it: where to go next and when to leave. This is the economists' "collective action problem" – a phenomenon with a much better evidentiary basis than the hypothetical, far-fetched "dopamine loop" theory.

To understand whom a platform treats well and whom it abuses, look not to who pays it and who doesn't. Instead, ask yourself: who has the platform locked in? The more any stakeholder to a platform stands to lose by leaving, the worse the platform can treat them without risking their departure. Thus the beneficent face that tech companies turn to their most cherished tech workers, and the hierarchy of progressively more-abusive conditions for other workers – worse treatment for those whose work-visas are tied to their employment, and the very worst treatment for contractors testing the code, writing the documentation, labelling the data or cleaning the toilets.

If you care about how people are treated by platforms, you can't just tell them to pay for services instead of using ad-supported media. The most important factor in getting decent treatment out of a tech company isn't whether you pay with cash instead of attention – it's whether you're locked in, and thus a flight risk whom the platform must cater to.

It's perfectly possible for market dynamics to play out in a system in which we pay with our attention by watching ads. More than 50% of all web users have installed an ad-blocker, the largest boycott in the history of civilization:

https://doc.searls.com/2023/11/11/how-is-the-worlds-biggest-boycott-doing/

Ad-supported companies make an offer: How about in exchange for looking at this content, you let us spy on you in ways that would make Orwell blush and then cram a torrent of targeted ads into your eyeballs?" Ad-blockers let you make a counter-offer: "How about 'nah'?"

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/07/adblocking-how-about-nah

But ad-blocking is only possible on an open platform. A closed, locked-down platform that is illegal to modify isn't a walled garden, a fortress that keeps out the bad guys – it's a walled prison that locks you in, a prisoner of the worst impulses of the tech giant that built it. Apple can defend you from other companies' spying ways, but when Apple decides to spy on you, it's a felony to jailbreak your Iphone and block Apple's surveillance:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/05/battery-vampire/#drained

I am no true believer in markets – but the people who say that paying for products will "align incentives" and make tech better claim to believe in the power of markets to make everyone better off. But real markets aren't just places where companies sell things – they're also places where companies buy things. Monopolies short-circuit the power of customer choice to force companies to do better. But monopsonies – markets dominated by powerful buyers – are just as poisonous to the claimed benefits of markets.

Even if you are "the product" – that is, even if you're selling your attention to a platform to package up and sell to an advertiser – that in no way precludes your getting decent treatment from the platform. A world where we can avail ourselves of blockers, where interoperablity eases our exodus from abusive platforms, where privacy law sets a floor below which we cannot bargain is a world where it doesn't matter if you're "the product" or "the customer" – you can still get a square deal.

The platforms used to treat us well and now treat us badly. That's not because they were setting a patient trap, luring us in with good treatment in the expectation of locking us in and turning on us. Tech bosses do not have the executive function to lie in wait for years and years.

Rather, as tech platforms eliminated competition, captured their regulators and expanded their IP rights so that interoperability was no longer a threat, they became too big to care whether any of their stakeholders were happy. First they came for the users, sure, but then they turned on the publishers, the advertisers, and finally, even their once-pampered tech workers:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/10/the-proletarianization-of-tech-workers/

MLK said that "the law can't make a man love me, but it can stop him from lynching me." It's impossible to get tech bosses to believe you deserve care and decency, but you can stop them from abusing you. The way to do that is by making them fear you – by abolishing the laws that create lock-in, by legally enshrining a right to privacy, by protecting competition.

It's not by giving them money. Paying for a service does not make a company fear you, and anyone who thinks they can buy a platform's loyalty by paying for a service is a simp. A corporation is an immortal, transhuman colony organism that uses us as inconvenient gut-flora: no matter how much you love it, it will never love you back. It can't experience love – only fear.

---

Hey look at this (permalink)

---

This day in history (permalink)

#20yrsago Bill O’Reilly mistakes Globe and Mail for Socialist Worker https://web.archive.org/web/20040426005411/http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040421/DOYLE21/TPColumnists/

#20yrsago Silmarillion in 1,000 words https://web.archive.org/web/20060427200009/https://camwyn.livejournal.com/328358.html

#20yrsago London: The (Magnificent) Biography https://memex.craphound.com/2004/04/22/london-the-magnificent-biography/

#15yrsago UAE royal caught torturing man on video https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=7402099

#15yrsago Joe Biden promises a blank check to the entertainment cartel https://web.archive.org/web/20110624055700/http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10224689-38.html

#15yrsago Entertainment industry’s greedy lobbying is their undoing https://web.archive.org/web/20090425083430/http://www.internetevolution.com/document.asp?doc_id=175415&

#15yrsago JG Ballard eulogized by John Clute https://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/j-g-ballard-writer-whose-dystopian-visions-helped-shape-our-view-of-the-modern-world-1671634.html

#10yrsago Appeals court orders Obama administration to disclose the legal theory for assassination of Americans https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/obama-ordered-to-divulge-legal-basis-for-killing-americans-with-drones/

#10yrsago Shakespeare’s Beehive: analysis of newly discovered dictionary that Shakespeare owned and annotated https://endlessbookshelf.net/beehive.html

#10yrsago Reddit’s /r/technology demoted over scandal of secret censorship that blocked Internet freedom stories https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27100773

#5yrsago Facebook has hired the Patriot Act’s co-author and “day-to-day manager” to be its new general counsel https://thehill.com/policy/technology/440085-facebook-taps-lawyer-who-helped-write-patriot-act/

#5yrsago Google walkout organizers say they’re being retaliated against for demanding ethical standards https://www.wired.com/story/google-walkout-organizers-say-theyre-facing-retaliation/

#5yrsago Elizabeth Warren’s latest proposal: cancel student debt, make college free https://medium.com/@teamwarren/im-calling-for-something-truly-transformational-universal-free-public-college-and-cancellation-of-a246cd0f910f

#5yrsago Heiress “Instagram influencer” whose parents are accused of paying a $500K bribe to get her into USC has trademark application rejected for punctuation errors https://www.huffpost.com/entry/olivia-jade-trademark-punctuation_n_5c9c8f16e4b07c8866313c5e?ncid=newsltushpmgnews__TheMorningEmail__032919

#5yrsago Zuck turned American classrooms into nonconsensual laboratories for his pet educational theories, and now they’re rebelling https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/21/technology/silicon-valley-kansas-schools.html

#5yrsago Platform cooperativism (or, how to turn gig-economy jobs into $22.25/hour jobs) https://www.wired.com/story/when-workers-control-gig-economy/

#5yrsago A secret Finnish subculture of women and girls who ride hobbyhorses has come out of the shadows https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imW7EGQcJck

#5yrsago Most Republican voters were Trumpists before Trump, and most of the rest have converted since 2016 https://crookedtimber.org/2019/04/21/transactional-trumpism/

#5yrsago Stop & Shop strike convinces 75% of loyal customers to take business elsewhere https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2019/04/19/visits-loyal-stop-shop-customers-decline-during-strike/aGr2bUg75Mbu3zY0y5YZiI/story.html

#5yrsago After Notre Dame bailout Yellow Vests urge more Victor Hugo tributes, starting with “Les Miserables” https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/04/20/yellow-vests-demonstrate-paris-notre-dame-donations-highlight-wealth-inequality

#1yrago How workers get trapped by "bondage fees" https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/21/bondage-fees/#doorman-building

---

Upcoming appearances (permalink)

• The Bezzle at Book Passage Corte Madera (Marin County), April 27
  https://www.bookpassage.com/event/cory-doctorow-bezzle-martin-hench-novel-corte-madera-store

• Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (Winnipeg), May 2
  https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/cory-doctorow-tickets-798820071337

• Wordfest (Calgary), May 3
  https://wordfest.com/2024/event/wordfest-presents-cory-doctorow-2/

• Massy Arts (Vancouver), May 4
  https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/solo-reading-cory-doctorow-the-bezzle-tickets-876989167207

• Tartu Prima Vista Literary Festival, May 5-11
  https://tartu2024.ee/en/kirjandusfestival/

• Tim O’Reilly and Cory Doctorow on “Enshittification” and the Future of AI, May 14
  https://www.oreilly.com/live-events/tim-oreilly-and-cory-doctorow-on-enshittification-and-the-future-of-ai/0642572001651/

• "Finding the Money" screening (LA), May 15
  https://www.laemmle.com/film/finding-money?date=2024-05-15

• Media Ecology Association keynote (Amherst, NY), Jun 6-9
  https://media-ecology.org/convention

• American Association of Law Libraries keynote (Chicago), Jul 21
  https://www.aallnet.org/conference/agenda/keynote-speaker/

---

Recent appearances (permalink)

• Show Me The Money Club (The Rideshare Guy)
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCETi3XqSds

• NUOVO BARETTO UTOPIA
  https://videoteca.kenobit.it/w/azRmQBCenVwjSRz9WCp8JS

• How is life becoming “enshitified"? (Open To Debate)
  https://soundcloud.com/canada2020/open-to-debate-how-is-life-becoming-enshitified?in=canada2020/sets/open-to-debate-with-david

---

Latest books (permalink)

• The Bezzle: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about prison-tech and other grifts, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), February 2024 (the-bezzle.org). Signed, personalized copies at Dark Delicacies (https://www.darkdel.com/store/p3062/Available_Feb_20th%3A_The_Bezzle_HB.html#/).

• "The Lost Cause:" a solarpunk novel of hope in the climate emergency, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), November 2023 (http://lost-cause.org). Signed, personalized copies at Dark Delicacies (https://www.darkdel.com/store/p3007/Pre-Order_Signed_Copies%3A_The_Lost_Cause_HB.html#/)

• "The Internet Con": A nonfiction book about interoperability and Big Tech (Verso) September 2023 (http://seizethemeansofcomputation.org). Signed copies at Book Soup (https://www.booksoup.com/book/9781804291245).

• "Red Team Blues": "A grabby, compulsive thriller that will leave you knowing more about how the world works than you did before." Tor Books http://redteamblues.com. Signed copies at Dark Delicacies (US): and Forbidden Planet (UK): https://forbiddenplanet.com/385004-red-team-blues-signed-edition-hardcover/.

• "Chokepoint Capitalism: How to Beat Big Tech, Tame Big Content, and Get Artists Paid, with Rebecca Giblin", on how to unrig the markets for creative labor, Beacon Press/Scribe 2022 https://chokepointcapitalism.com

• "Attack Surface": The third Little Brother novel, a standalone technothriller for adults. The Washington Post called it "a political cyberthriller, vigorous, bold and savvy about the limits of revolution and resistance." Order signed, personalized copies from Dark Delicacies https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1840/Available_Now%3A_Attack_Surface.html

• "How to Destroy Surveillance Capitalism": an anti-monopoly pamphlet analyzing the true harms of surveillance capitalism and proposing a solution. https://onezero.medium.com/how-to-destroy-surveillance-capitalism-8135e6744d59?sk=f6cd10e54e20a07d4c6d0f3ac011af6b) (signed copies: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2024/Available_Now%3A__How_to_Destroy_Surveillance_Capitalism.html)

• "Little Brother/Homeland": A reissue omnibus edition with a new introduction by Edward Snowden: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250774583; personalized/signed copies here: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1750/July%3A__Little_Brother_%26_Homeland.html

• "Poesy the Monster Slayer" a picture book about monsters, bedtime, gender, and kicking ass. Order here: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781626723627. Get a personalized, signed copy here: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2682/Corey_Doctorow%3A_Poesy_the_Monster_Slayer_HB.html#/.

---

Upcoming books (permalink)

• Picks and Shovels: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about the heroic era of the PC, Tor Books, February 2025

• Unauthorized Bread: a graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, 2025

---

Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing:

• A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING

• Picks and Shovels, a Martin Hench noir thriller about the heroic era of the PC. FORTHCOMING TOR BOOKS JAN 2025

• Vigilant, Little Brother short story about remote invigilation. FORTHCOMING ON TOR.COM

• Spill, a Little Brother short story about pipeline protests. FORTHCOMING ON TOR.COM

Latest podcast: Capitalists Hate Capitalism https://craphound.com/news/2024/04/14/capitalists-hate-capitalism/

---

This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.

---

How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Twitter (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://twitter.com/doctorow

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. Interviewing with blue or pink hair

In the last few years, I have started coloring my hair bright colors (blue, pink, green, etc.). I have always felt self-conscious about my hair, and the colors now make me feel much better about it. Also, I just love bright colors and I enjoy presenting myself to the world this way. I get a lot of compliments on my hair, including from people at work. Given that I work in quite a formal environment in a corporate accounting firm, I have been surprised and pleased to find that the colorful hair has not been a problem and my bosses just go with it. I attend plenty of meetings with clients, and no one externally or internally has suggested I’m putting people off. That said, I hadn’t yet found my way to colorful hair when I first started, and so I’m not sure how they would have reacted if I showed up this way in my interview.

Which leads me to my question. When I eventually move firms, do I change my hair back for the interview process? I don’t really like this idea, because it feels fraudulent (given that I will be planning to bring back the colorful hair in due course). I also feel like I am more likely to find an office that is the right fit for me if I present myself honestly. Then again, while I don’t mind putting off a few interviewers, I do want to get at least some job offers, so if the hair will likely put everyone off, then it will have to go I suppose. So in this day and age, is it an absolute no-no to show up to an interview with wacky hair colors? Or will interviewers take this in stride as an inoffensive personal quirk, if I am otherwise dressed in neat corporate attire and act like a normal person?

No, green, pink, or blue hair is not an absolute no-go in an interview the way it used to be for many jobs. It’s become much more accepted and much more commonplace. You will still find some people who think it’s too out there (or who believe it will be too out there for their clients) and won’t want to hire you because of it, but plenty of people won’t care and will even like it. The math does change in more conservative fields, but that’s evolving too. (And frustratingly, there are places that are fine with colorful hair once they know and like you because you’ve worked there a while, but would still judge someone for showing up to an interview with it. Those places are also becoming less common though.)

As for what to do, it’s a question of both risk management and screening. On the screening side, if you want to be sure you end up somewhere that will be fine with colorful hair after you start, having it in the interview is a really good way to screen for that. On the other hand, on the risk management side, are you willing to risk getting fewer offers because of it? Some people’s answer to that would be a resounding “yes” and others would answer “no.” I tend to think that if you’re reasonably confident that you’re an appealing candidate with options, you should show up as who you are and see what happens.

2. Building staff damaged my bookcase

My organization recently leased an office for me in an office building of a group tangentially related to ours. I wasn’t given much of a budget for furniture, so I brought in a few of my own items. One of them was a barrister bookcase that was my great-grandfather’s, over 100 years old.

I asked the building’s maintenance staff to hang some artwork for me, which they did, but they used the top of the bookcase as a workspace and carelessly scratched it with nails and screws. The damage is minimal but certainly noticeable.

Part of me realizes that this is the risk of bringing old furniture into an office, but I’m very upset. This was an unforced error, and something that could’ve been avoided if the staff had spent a few seconds putting a cloth down or using a different surface. Am I out of line in asking for some recompense — a simple repair or the like?

Yeah, I wouldn’t. If you have a good relationship with the maintenance staff, you could mention what happened and ask if they have advice on repairing it and maybe they’ll offer to take care of it themselves … but I wouldn’t ask or expect them to do it themselves, since it really is the risk you take when bringing in your own furniture.

In general, I’d say not to store anything at work that’s really valuable to you unless you’re wiling to risk something happening to it.

3. New chair sends non-urgent texts in my off hours

I am a teacher and have a new department chair this year. She is young and very eager. She repeatedly texts me about non-urgent issues on weekends and on school breaks. The content of these messages are never urgent. For example: “I emailed you the completed performance objectives” or “I just finished creating our first unit test and emailed it to you.” These are small items that don’t need to be communicated urgently outside of work hours, but it almost feels as if she wants to remind me that she is working on a Sunday or during vacation since she is a good employee. This feels intrusive in a time that should be away from work. Am I being sensitive? How do I respond to this without sounding like a jerk?

You’re not being overly sensitive. She shouldn’t be texting you outside of work hours unless it’s truly urgent and time-sensitive. Texting you to tell you she emailed something that can easily wait until you’re back at work is ridiculous.

Say this to her: “I try to disconnect from work during our off-hours, so can I ask you to email rather than text unless something is truly urgent? Emailing it is great and I’ll see it when I’m back in work mode.” Consider encouraging your colleagues to say something similar.

4. Do you need to have a documented accommodation in order to sue?

Someone on my team was fired recently (let’s call her Cassandra), and apparently it took a long time to do because HR was worried she would sue. Cassandra had been on a PIP and didn’t meet expectations, but she has a chronic condition and was missing a lot of work because of it. My understanding is that she wasn’t using her PTO to call out, which would have been fine — she just wasn’t showing up or working full days. But HR thought that because Cassandra missing work was linked to this chronic condition, she could sue for discrimination if that was given as a reason they gave for firing her. I don’t know if Cassandra had documented this condition as a disability or if it was just common knowledge, or if she asked for any accommodations. But if she never asked for accommodations of any kind, would a lawsuit actually hold up?

Potentially, yes. If an employer knows an employee has a disability and knows or should know that the employee is experiencing workplace problems because of the disability, the employee is protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act. It sounds like your employer knew Cassandra was missing work at least in part because of her medical condition, so yes, the ADA would have been in play. That doesn’t mean they couldn’t still hold her to reasonable standards like “you need to alert us if you’re not coming in or you’re leaving early.” But it does mean your company wasn’t wrong to want to navigate it carefully. They might have navigated it too carefully — which isn’t uncommon when there’s a disability in play — but that’s hard to say without knowing more.

5. An employer that ghosted me wants me to interview again

About a year and a half ago, I interviewed with a company that I was eager to work for at the time. After the first two interviews went well, they reached out asking to schedule a third interview. I responded immediately to schedule the next round, but the company completely ghosted me. I sent professional follow-up emails to both the recruiter and the director I had previously interviewed with but got no response from either. I moved on, frustrated, but luckily found a new role on a different team at the same company where I was already working.

Cut to yesterday when I received an email from the same company I interviewed with previously. It was even from the same recruiter! She is looking to fill some new roles. I did see they have a new director as of about eight months ago. I’m not actively looking for a new job, but would consider something if it was the right fit and compensation. Should I tell the recruiter that their previous ghosting experience makes me hesitant to interview with them again? Or should I let sleeping dogs lie and move on?

I would love to say yes because employers need to hear that there are consequences for how they treat people … but realistically, ghosting is so, so common in hiring that they’re likely to think you’re being overly sensitive or a prima donna. To be clear, you’re not; that behavior is rude. But it’s standard practice for so many employers that it’s tough to raise without risking them just finding you annoying.

It’s easier if you’re definitely not interested in interviewing with them ever again. In that case you could say, “We were in talks about 18 months ago and we were supposed to schedule a third interview but I never heard back and no one responded to my attempts to reach you. It didn’t leave a great taste in my mouth, so I’m going to pass this time.” I suppose if you are open to interviewing again, you could replace that last sentence with, “Can I ask what happened before we restart the process?” But honestly, even if they apologize and say it was an oversight, that still might not affect whether it happens again.

Related:
can I tell a recruiter how rude it was to ghost me after my interview?

REDWOOD CITY, CA—As the woman held her newborn baby for the first time and acknowledged that she wasn’t exactly sure what she was expecting, sources confirmed Monday that it was unclear why local 36-year-old Rose Jeffries thought the thing she just pushed out of her vagina would be cute. “Well, I guess that’s egg on…

Read more...

DENVER—Insisting a third party be present when they made the announcement, the nation’s therapists held a press conference Monday in which they refused to see you anymore because you scare them. “I’m sorry, but it frightens us how disturbed and unwell you are, and because of that, we cannot continue on with you as our…

Read more...

I mean, let’s be real, the kitchen is gorgeous and all the hardwood floors are completely original and in impeccable condition, but Ohio? Come on. We don’t even know where Powell is.

Read more...

SALISBURY, NC—Stressing that he did not need to put up with that kind of attitude, a local skydiving instructor reported Monday that he was not going to open the parachute until you changed your tone. “To be honest, I feel like I deserve more respect than what you’re giving me right now, especially when you’re the one…

Read more...

AURORA, IL—Wondering aloud to himself why they made those things so damn small, local dad Henry Jackson reportedly blew through 10 of his child’s snack packs in one sitting Monday. “Goddamn, no matter how many of these I eat, I’m still hungry,” said the father of two, who, in the span of a single commercial break…

Read more...

Every so often, somebody rediscovers my story of buying an entire Egghead Software store. One question that comes up is the issue of taxes. (You can never avoid taxes. Taxes are due today for most people in the United States.)

If the employees were allowed to keep the software provided they tested the program and filed bugs against it, did that count as work compensation that became taxable income?

The thing is, nobody ever checked whether you tested the program you took, and it was obvious to everybody participating in the activity, seeing as you just picked up the software and walked out of the room without filling out any paperwork. You were assumed to be a well-meaning member of the team who wouldn’t show up for an activity without any intention of doing it. The expectation that you test the program was just that: An expectation. It wasn’t a condition.

My understanding is that this makes the software count as a gift that falls under the de minimis rule of the United States tax code. This was a one-time thing, so the frequency criterion is met. The value of the software was well under $100, so that requirement was met. And since nobody actually kept track of who took which software, the administrative impracticality requirement was also satisfied.

But really, this was just a development manager taking it upon himself to do some unconventional application compatibility test coverage and to instill camaraderie at the same time.

Bonus chatter: During one of the many iterations of this story being retold, someone remarked that they got a copy of the video game Wing Commander III through this exercise. I immediately remembered that they fulfilled their expectation by filing a bug against Windows 95: When you earned the cloaking device on level 58 or something, you couldn’t activate it.

Fortunately, they provided a save-game at level 58, so I didn’t have to play all the way to level 58 by myself.

The problem was that the hotkey for activating the cloaking device was Ctrl+C, and that conflicted with the use of Ctrl+C to cancel an active clipboard paste operation into an MS-DOS session. Normally, Windows 95 realized that there was no active paste active and replayed the hotkey into the MS-DOS session. However, the replay of the hotkey was apparently too fast for this game to recognize, so it never activated the cloaking device.

I fixed it by changing Windows 95 so that it installed the Ctrl+C hotkey handler only when a clipboard paste operation was active, and removed it when the paste operation completed. That way, when you hit it outside of a paste operation, the keys were visible to the game at human speeds, and this allowed it to engage the cloaking device.

The post What were the tax consequences of letting Windows 95 team members keep a piece of software as long as they tested it? appeared first on The Old New Thing.

hi wyd nm lol m2

This is a new song on @TWRPband album, go follow them. I listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4tSXOLPf_4 when I run on the treadmill and it makes me go faster

Listen To "Online" spotify -https://open.spotify.com/track/69NC8FNTlg78LJG4tTk0eI?si=c940516b22424aa0

TWRP are on tour in North America right now, go watch them or suffer mass humiliation in front of your cutest peers

PHILADELPHIA—Her footsteps echoing in the night as she wandered down the unlit side street, local woman Caitlin Morgan was reportedly lured into a dark alley Friday by a sign reading “Free self-defense class for women.” “Free self-defense class this way? Don’t mind if I do,” said Morgan, who delightedly followed the…

Read more...

WASHINGTON—Drawing swift backlash from critics concerned about the agency’s spending, the Internal Revenue Service came under fire Friday for blowing $350 million to develop a massively multiplayer tax-filing video game entitled Tales Of Revenue. “When I first downloaded it from IRS.gov, I thought it’d just be a…

Read more...

Start your free 30-day trial at https://brilliant.org/CodeParade/ and get 20% off the annual premium subscription.

Get 4D Golf on Steam: https://store.steampowered.com/app/2147950/4D_Golf

4D Golf Devlog #3: https://youtu.be/dbq9uX_MycY
4D Golf Playlist: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLh9DXIT3m6N4GygehtlHl0ukgrgPJZteI

Join the discord
https://discord.gg/P9taqBJKJq

Official 4D Golf + CodeParade Merch
https://crowdmade.com/collections/codeparade

Music by philmakesnoise
#4dgolf

VANCOUVER – The Canadian Olympic Committee and the Canadian Paralympic Committee have partnered with the Alberta Beef Council to unveil the new athlete kits for the Paris 2024 Summer Olympics made entirely out of 100% Canadian Beef. “We are proud of our sustainable, biodegradable athlete uniforms that are stylish, functional, and ready for grilling,” said […]

The post New Canadian Olympic uniforms made from real Alberta beef appeared first on The Beaverton.

LOS ANGELES—Circulating online via a Google Drive link, an alleged leak of Taylor Swift’s The Tortured Poets Department left fans speculating Thursday that the new album would be all about the artist’s sink not draining good because it was clogged by long hair. Swift subverted expectations that she would address her…

Read more...

LOS ANGELES—Noting that the highly anticipated biopic had always been a dream project, sources confirmed Thursday that Martin Scorsese would direct Leonardo DiCaprio as Frank Sinatra for the rest of their lives. “After working together on six different films, Scorsese is beyond excited to team up with Leo and bring…

Read more...

WASHINGTON—With worms in the pile of plant debris already starting to eat away at the late president’s flesh, veteran White House gardener Dale Haney told reporters Thursday he had found a rotting Joe Biden in a compost bin on the South Lawn of the executive mansion. “Oh, man, the poor little guy must’ve fallen in…

Read more...

During an audit, Arkansas lawmakers questioned Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ (R) staff about the purchase of a $19,000 lectern, a charge which include a $2,500 “consulting fee” and a $2,200 road case. What do you think?

Read more...

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

Here are three updates from past letter-writers.

1. Random people use our lactation room for breaks and lunch (#3 at the link)

I really appreciated seeing your response and those of the commenters. It helped me feel validated and affirmed for me that I was not being overly entitled or too demanding in my attempts to resolve the issue. I did eventually take the matter to HR. Starting this week, the room is to be closed and locked by default. The other lactating mother and I were given keys (as was suggested by several commenters). And as for the concern for walking in on each other, the room has a highly sensitive motion sensor light and a window over the door, so it’s pretty easy to tell that if the light is on it’s occupied.

2. My boss says I’m an “unapproachable” manager

Thank you for answering my letter, and thank you to everyone who commented. Your answer and peoples’ descriptions of their own unapproachable managers helped me realize that I was actually pretty approachable! If I was in an office, the door would be open unless I was on the phone. When staff came to me, I would welcome them with a smile and give them my full attention. Sometimes I might say “let me just finish this sentence so I don’t lose my train of thought” and finish typing, but I always smiled and made eye contact while saying that. I’m an active listener, valued my staff’s feedback, and was responsive when others needed action from me.

I sat on your answer and what I read in the comments for a few weeks, trying to objectively assess my behaviour with everything I’d read in mind, then returned to my boss and asked her to elaborate on what she meant by unapproachable. I also asked whether the feedback had come from a direct report or one of my peers. She seemed confused and played it off like she couldn’t remember. By then, it had been several months, but I’m still bewildered by this response, because we had turned it into a bit of an inside joke. At the time of our initial conversation, I had suggested that maybe my struggle with small talk had contributed to that feedback, and joked that my natural reaction to seeing acquaintances in the grocery store is to duck behind a display. We laughed about it and started joking about my social awkwardness regularly. She’d say something like “drive safe, it’s icy out there,” and I’d reply, robotically, “I am uncomfortable with this excessive display of concern for my well-being” and we’d laugh. I wonder if maybe I interpreted an offhand comment as criticism, and built it up in my mind as a much bigger deal than it was.

I’m no longer at that job. The nature of the work meant that my days were very long and the hours were often unpredictable. Now that I have two young children, I just could not reconcile my work obligations with school and daycare drop-offs and pick-ups. I’m in a different line of work and no longer in a management position, and I am very happy. The letter I wrote to you was a catalyst for me realizing that I do not like being a manager. Hiring, firing, performance reviews, PIPs, and tough conversations — I hated all of that, but people management was the only option for upward mobility and increased salary in my woefully low-paying previous field.

Your blog was invaluable to me during my job search. Thank you for running this site, and thank you to your commenters for taking the time to provide feedback of their own. I read every one.

3. My coworker berates me all day long (first update here)

Not long after my first update, I accepted a temporary records management position at a university I’d long been interested in working for. I really enjoyed my coworkers and my time there helped me regain some of my confidence after leaving my prior firm and subsequent layoff. I’d hoped after the temp position ended, I’d be able to move into something full-time either in that same department or elsewhere within the university. Although I did good work and was well-regarded by my managers and the team, in the end there wasn’t an opportunity to move into a full-time position.

After we parted ways, I applied for a handful of positions within the university and had a few interviews, but also kept my eyes peeled elsewhere just in case. Almost on a whim, I applied for a records management position at a local bank, went through a few rounds of interviews, and accepted my current position. While I was sad the university didn’t work out, this new role had generous pay, great benefits, and good work/life balance, and they seemed very happy to bring me in. I have been there a little over a year and am so glad I took it. There are no Helens, I can take PTO and not walk into piles of work that no one who was supposed to cover for me bothered to do, I don’t get snapped at when I need something or ask a question, and when I’m asked to correct something, I’m not berated endlessly over and over. I like my colleagues, the workload keeps me busy but it’s not overwhelming and I can get help when I need it. And I’m pleased to say I haven’t needed a PITA folder in my inbox in quite some time. It’s taken a while but my mental health has improved immensely since I left my old job. I didn’t realize how much Helen and the broader culture there were harming my self-worth and how depressed and anxious I’d become over my time there. I know I was good at my job — otherwise I wouldn’t have lasted as long as I did — but towards the end I really started to think there was something wrong with me for not being able to keep up with endless demands and nonstop workload. It took getting away to realize how bad it was, but I’m happy to report I’m doing much better now. Thanks again to everyone who commented and offered suggestions and encouragement!

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

A reader writes:

For the last nine months, I’ve been doing a (paid) internship at a foundation that is aimed at recent graduates looking to enter the nonprofit world. It’s been a great experience, both in the kind of work I am doing and the people I am working with. I’ve also consistently gotten great feedback, to the point where my boss has said multiple times that she’d like me to return to work for them once I have the necessary degree.

However, while looking at our internal phone registry, I recently discovered that my boss originally had meant to hire someone else for the internship. While I wouldn’t rely on this information alone, I also got an accidental glance at an email from last year that referred to the area of study of the future intern. This was a very specific area and matched the person whose name I found in the registry. Not being their first choice would also help explain why their time frame for offering me the position was slightly longer than expected, especially having now witnessed from the inside how quickly my boss likes to settle these things.

Would it be reasonable to ask either my boss or my mentor (who is a separate person on the same team) about this? I know there are many potential reasons why someone else was initially chosen for the position. It could simply be that this person was able to start earlier than I could – my start date was later than they would have preferred. But if, for example, there was something that I could have handled better during my interview, that piece of information could be very valuable in future job searches.

Generally, I feel like I have a really good relationship with both my boss and my mentor. However, they never mentioned any of this to me (I was not rejected during the period of time where they apparently offered the job to someone else), which is why I would feel a bit awkward about bringing it up out of the blue. Would it be reasonable to ask one of them about this? And if it is an appropriate question to ask, how would I best frame it? Or should I just let this go?

I’ve read your previous answer to a similar question, where you said the person could bring this up related to their future interview. However, I feel like my situation is somewhat different, since they don’t know I‘m aware that I wasn’t their first choice and since there is no position with them that I would immediately be applying for, as I need to go back to school first anyway.

Don’t bring it up.

There are tons and tons of reasons why other people might be offered a job before you are, and they don’t generally mean “you sucked in specific way X but we decided to take a chance on you anyway.” They generally mean “we had four people we would have happily hired and only one slot to fill” or “you were great, which is why we ultimately hired you, but someone else was just better” or “you were good but, man, I really clicked with the person we offered it to first” or all sorts of other things that won’t be useful to you.

Asking why you were the second choice can come across as overly in need of reassurance, and as if you don’t really understand how hiring works (which, being an intern, you don’t and that’s completely OK — but it would be slightly off to ask). It also risks putting your boss on the spot. Plus, nine months after the hiring process, there’s a strong chance your boss won’t even remember anything useful about the other candidates or the decision-making process at this point.

They hired you, they’re happy with you, all is well that ends well!