California - Los Angeles Times

/california

  • Écrire un commentaire
  • Écrire un commentaire
    • @02myseenthis01
      oAnth CC BY

      ▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tg2V9WEH1ik


      2025-04-25, 55 min.

      On the “Ersatz Religion” of Transhumanism: Interview With Dr. Aaron Kheriaty

      2025-09-02

      ►https://www.racket.news/p/on-the-ersatz-religion-of-transhumanism

      “I think it’s an ersatz religion,” says Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, of a transhumanist movement that is suddenly very relevant, in the age of people falling in love with their AIs, making radical changes to their bodies, and letting AIs [counsel them toward suicide](▻https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/26/tech/openai-chatgpt-teen-suicide-lawsuit). “I think it’s a religious substitute for people living in a secular age.”

      Racket readers know Aaron as one of the most suppressed voices from the pandemic. He lost his job at the University of California-Irvine as a psychiatry professor and director of medical ethics after refusing to be vaccinated, [citing “natural immunity](▻https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-01-02/uc-irvine-fires-physician-who-refused-to-get-vaccinated-claiming-natural-im (The Los Angeles Times added the scare quotes). His lawsuit was dismissed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which declared “[Kheriaty fails to offer any appropriate historical example to establish a ‘fundamental right’ to be free from a vaccine mandate](▻https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/22-55001/22-55001-2022-11-23.html).” Along with Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya and Harvard’s Martin Kulldorff, he went on to be a plaintiff in the Supreme Court’s digital censorship case _[Murthy v. Missouri](▻https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-411_3dq3.pdf)_, and at one point during peak Covid mania was deemed so toxic, podcaster Alison Morrow was [fired from a Washington state job](▻https://www.racket.news/p/interview-with-alison-morrow-on-censorship) [for interviewing him]. By any measure, he’s one of the era’s biggest free speech heroes, having taken on both the medical and health establishments during a time when both may have been at their most censorious.

      I called Aaron after the events of last week seemed to necessitate a crash course in transhumanism, about which he delivered a terrific speech earlier this year:

      Oxford’s Nick Bostrum transhumanism as the rejection of the traditional idea that the “human condition” is static, and that science and technology may be embraced to welcome in a “dazzling landscape of radical possibilities, ranging from unlimited bliss to the extinction of intelligent life.” That last notion may sound grim, but transhumanists usually focus on a more positive menu of possibilities, ranging from vastly extended life spans to lives of boundless pleasure to superintelligence to immortality. A precondition for any and all these beliefs, however, is the idea that human nature is neither fixed nor worth preserving.

      It takes a scholar to see the whole landscape of the issues involved, and as a Roman Catholic Aaron also understands the many spiritual angles with which transhumanism intersects. Like me, he’s had the misfortune to deal with downstream expressions of the new utopian vision, particularly the idea that sheer processing power can and should erase “harmful” voices from the public square. Is transhumanism a new idea, brought by necessity into existence due to the appearance of truly transcendent technologies, or is this the same old doomed human attempt to escape our fate that ensnared everyone from Oedipus to Macbeth to Dorian Gray? Thanks to Aaron for the fascinating discussion below:

      *Matt Taibbi:* *When did you first become interested in that question, the transhumanism issue?*

      *Aaron Kheriaty:* I’ve had an interest in transhumanism, I would say, for a few years, just philosophically on a low level. Entry-level forms of transhumanism basically involve questions about the use of medical technologies for so-called human enhancement. So, that’s a bioethics question that I’ve had an interest in since medical school. I did a research paper when I was a fourth-year medical student on the use of psychotropic drugs for altering personality, basically. So, the idea of so-called enhancement is we can use various medical interventions, medications, for example, to make sick people well and to treat disease. But it also seems to be the case for some of these things that we can use them to make healthy people “better”… bigger, faster, stronger, smarter. And the easiest one to understand because it’s pretty ubiquitous is the abuse of something like Adderall. So, stimulant abuse or misuse — for some people it’s not abuse, they consider it enhancement. To help study for an exam, for example. Or to help pilots stay awake longer.

      To bypass the normal sleep requirements or to try to get a little bit of a cognitive edge for performance on intellectual tasks would be one example of so-called team enhancement. And so, that raises questions. Is this an appropriate use of these technologies? Should physicians be participating in this? It seems contrary to the Hippocratic oath for doctors to provide healthy people with medical interventions that carry some degree of risk. So, that’s entry-level transhumanism, and you can go from there to much more radical attempts to remake human nature using science and technology, including already-available medical interventions and biotechnological interventions that haven’t been invented yet. And the idea of radical life extension, for example, through gene editing would be a next step up in terms of trying to refashion or remake human nature.

      *Matt Taibbi: About overuse of Adderall: we understand that to be something a doctor would consider abusive. You recommended reading Nick Bostrom, though, and I see back in 2001, he’s talking about “lifelong emotional well-being through recalibration of the pleasure centers” or “personality pills.” Isn’t that a next step up from merely using drugs as a temporary fix?*

      *Aaron Kheriaty:* That’s right. If you take transhumanism far enough, you get to the point where essentially there is no such thing as a human nature or a healthy, well-working human body that would be normative. The idea is that we’re just raw biological material. We’re a [blank slate](▻https://www.jochnowitz.net/Essays/BlankSlate.html) that you can refashion or remake with whatever technologies we’re capable of developing. And there’s this implicit idea in traditional Hippocratic medicine that there is a natural norm of health that the body tends toward when it’s working well. And we know what a healthy heart looks like. We know what healthy functioning kidneys look like. We know more or less what a healthy brain looks like, healthy, cognitive, and neurological functioning, and that’s what medicine needs to aim toward. But for someone like Bostrom, what we have instead is raw biological material that can be hacked and upgraded and the hardware is potentially infinitely malleable.

      And so, why not implant a device in the brain that would stimulate the pleasure centers and put you on a perpetual high if that’s what someone wants to do with their life? And to my mind, the problem with these interventions is that not only that they carry medical risks, but also, that they end up being, in a sense, dehumanizing.

      It might sound strange to say it, but a human life that is characterized by just perpetual pleasure is not really a human life that I would want to live. Pleasure is great when it’s attuned to reality. When my son graduates from college, I should feel good about that. But when my son injures himself in a snow skiing accident, I shouldn’t be on a perpetual high because I’ve implanted a chip in my brain. I should feel some level of distress and concern that’s being attuned to reality. And living in some sort of perpetual opium den because I turned on a switch in my brain is a dehumanizing existence that I think most normal people wouldn’t want and probably shouldn’t want. And a society where everyone is doing that is probably not a society that we would want to live in.

      *Matt Taibbi: This is the one area where these people have succeeded in implanting doubt in my mind. I recoil when transhumanists talk about being able to hack humanity, but I’m no scientist. I don’t know if they’re right. I believe, based on books I’ve read and my own experience, that human nature is real. Is my instinctive negative reaction just an article of faith on my part as well? Is the instinct to defend “human nature” a spiritual reaction?*

      *Aaron Kheriaty:* The question of whether or not there is such a thing as human nature could be construed as a religious or spiritual question, but it could also be construed as just a perennial philosophical question. You can look at pre-Christian philosophers like Plato and Aristotle, for example. Both of them believed there was such a thing as human nature. And particularly in Aristotle, you see his understanding of human flourishing, which is often translated as happiness, but it means more than just feeling good in Aristotle. It means the well-working of the human being as a whole is tied to an understanding of human nature. And so, human nature is a multilayered complex philosophical question, but there is such a thing as human nature and there are certain things that are appropriate to human beings and other things that are not appropriate to human beings.

      I think you can endorse that idea without necessarily endorsing a religious or spiritual worldview. Although the world’s great religious traditions probably all would endorse some notion of this idea of there being a human nature. But if you just look at the great literature of the world, the most compelling stories generally explore, in some depth and subtlety, the question, “What does it mean to be a human being?” And they explore it in a way that resonates with most people and with our understanding of what it means to be a human being.

      So, certainly, there are nihilistic or radically revolutionary philosophies that deny that there is such a thing as human nature that just say, “Well, we’re just raw material that we can remake any which way we want.” But as a friend of mine who teaches biology at Stanford likes to say, “Human nature always bats in the bottom of the ninth inning.” So, you could try to deny it, you could try to pretend that it doesn’t exist, and you could try to live your life as though anything goes, but that usually comes back to bite you in the end. And that usually comes back to bite societies in the end that don’t have some regard for the way human beings are meant to be.

      So, okay, what are the broad characteristics of what I’m calling human nature? Well, rational animals. So, all men, by nature, desire to know. That seems to be part of what drives us. We’re social animals. Pretending that human beings are not hardwired to connect with other human beings might be a nice fantasy, but it doesn’t work. If you put someone in solitary confinement, you’re not torturing them physically. You give them food, clothing, shelter. Maybe you put them in a really nice environment. You give them all the books to read that they want or whatever screens or whatever drugs they want to take, but you don’t have any connection with other human beings. People [in solitary confinement](▻https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/12/08/solitary_symposium) [eventually become psychotic](▻https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1362&context=law_journal_law_policy). They start hallucinating. The mind starts becoming unglued.

      That would suggest that it’s not good for a man to be alone, as it says in the Book of Genesis, that there is something about us that requires meaningful connections to other people. I could go on. Part of human nature is having bodily needs. Part of human nature is having an emotional life. As a psychiatrist, that’s what I’m trying to attend to all the time and trying to help my patients.

      *Matt Taibbi: When I read \[author\] [Yuval Noah Harari](▻https://www.ynharari.com), my first reaction is to think, “Well, this person isn’t really any different than the Dr. Frankenstein story Mary Shelley wrote, or the Tower of Babel story.” I always believed those tales resonated because we understand, on some level, that they’re true – that there’s a punishment for trying to play God. But* is *there anything that makes this current situation different? Harari’s whole argument seems to be that things are different, because we have new tools.*

      *Aaron Kheriaty*: I think that the only thing that’s different is the technologies. The tools are admittedly more powerful, but if the underlying premise is still, “Let’s deny reality and try to remake human beings and see what happens…” When your tools are relatively primitive, you can only do so much damage. When they’re more sophisticated, you can do a lot more damage. So, in a sense, I don’t think human nature has changed. I don’t think reality has changed. I would agree that with the tools we have at our disposal now, when you’re talking about nanotechnology, gene editing, more radical surgical interventions, there is the potential for messing up and doing a lot of harm, compared to most projects to remake human nature, which were projects to remake society. The first philosopher in the Western tradition to deny that there was such a thing as human nature was Karl Marx.

      The foundation of Marx’s philosophy was a radical rejection of any form of dependence. And he thought basically that mankind as a whole was a blank slate that we could radically refashion, but we did that by refashioning society. Because his materialism and his historicism basically said, “You’re entirely a product of social forces.” Or, “Matt Taibbi thinks what he thinks on politics or social questions, not because he reasoned to his conclusions or he examined evidence, or he did his research, or he learned some things from his friend, Walter Kirn, that made sense to him. Matt Taibbi thinks what he thinks because he’s white, male, cis, straight, and his biology is a product of these genes, and his ideas are just foam on the waves of those underlying material forces.”

      So, basically, the way you change people’s ideas and ideals and thought process is by changing the underlying material forces. Marx thought you did this economically through the communist revolution, and while his economics has been rejected, his basic metaphysical premise that human nature can be radically remade is still very current among a lot of people. And that can happen either through science and technology or Marxist thought, or that can happen through radically remaking society, which would change the way in which people think you’re infected by bourgeois consciousness now, but after the revolution, then you’re going to be enlightened with proletarian consciousness, or whatever.

      *Matt Taibbi: New “[ways of knowing](▻https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/2022-01/Intersectionality-resource-guide-and-toolkit-en.pdf).”**

      **Aaron Kheriaty*: That idea goes back to the 19th century. I think what we’ve seen in the 20th century and the 21st century is that this is going to happen through science and technology, the 2.0 version of that 19th century philosophy. But the basic metaphysical premise is the same, that there’s no such thing as human nature, and therefore, we can become whatever we want. It’s a utopian idea. And the development of a new science is typically accompanied by the development of a new utopia. It’s interesting, if you look back in the history of science, you can see this. It’s a recurring phenomenon. With the advent of psychoanalysis in the 1920s, you saw various utopian ideas accompanying that. With the development of neuroscience and with the development of genetics, we’ve seen this transhumanist utopia that we can control the direction of evolution through our own ingenuity and cleverness, and we’ll be able to create a society in which everyone’s happy all the time. And as with the communist utopias, when you start from faulty premises, it’s not just that you don’t end up where you thought you were going, but you end up in the opposite place.

      The Soviets didn’t just fail to achieve a workers’ paradise. They achieved a worker’s hellscape. They achieved a society in which no one wanted to work. “We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us,” was the joke among the people who were supposed to be liberated in this society. Look at any of the totalitarianisms of the 20th century. Not only did they fail to achieve their stated aims, they produced the exact opposite of what they aimed for.

      I worry that transhumanism would do the same thing. Not only would it fail to create superhumans or super happy humans, I worry that it would produce an increase in human misery.

      *Matt Taibbi: One might bring up the transgender issue as an example*.

      *Aaron Kheriaty*: That whole ideology is really starting to come apart at the seams. It was sustained by censorship and propaganda for a long time, as was the COVID debacle, but people are waking up and the detransitioners are finally getting a little bit of a voice. And then, of course, you have these awful situations like the Minnesota disaster.

      Look up Martine Rothblatt. Very wealthy philanthropist, trans-identified individual, who is also an ardent transhumanist, and she claimed that [transgenderism is the on-ramp to transhumanism](▻https://transreads.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/2021-12-23_61c4e86ac7091_FromTransgendertoTranshuman_AManifestoontheFree). Which I think is true. Gender theory, the underlying ideology is exactly what I described. Part of human nature is sexual differentiation. Male and female transgenderism simply denies that, right? We can refashion and recreate the body to match up with whatever a disembodied ghost in the machine mind says it ought to be.

      She’s interesting because this is not a critic of transgenderism, someone trying to critique it. This is someone who says, “No, this is part of a consistent ideology, and the first step in totally refashioning human nature is the idea that we could totally refashion human sexual identity.”

      *Matt Taibbi: Lastly: how much of this current transhumanist movement is born out of the presence of new technology, and how much of it is born out of the loss of connection to old thought? It feels like there’s a convergence of the two. As people become less connected to lessons of history, the utopian vision seems more and more possible.*

      *Aaron Kheriaty*: I think there is something there, but I would prioritize a change in ideas and a change in philosophical outlook as the primary driving force. So, I don’t deny that technology obviously shapes our thinking. And while I critiqued Marx earlier, I don’t want to suggest that underlying material factors don’t condition history. They obviously do, but what I want to say is that they’re not the only thing that conditions and alters historical developments. So, yeah, new technologies change our way of thinking, and they change our trajectory as a society.

      But then we also have to ask the question, why did human beings put their ingenuity and resources into developing particular kinds of technologies? There are lots of different technologies that we could be working on developing right now. There’s nothing inevitable about pushing in the direction of massive resources invested in AI, for example. That’s a choice that we’re making. And that choice may be driven by economic factors or large corporations that have financial interests in trying to develop this technology or whatever. But it is whatever the factors contributing to it are, a collective decision that we’re making. There’s nothing automatic about the direction we’re moving in with AI. In fact, we’re having to solve massive problems, especially related to energy, right?

      We’re talking about building nuclear power plants in order to power the next generation of AI and to have enough energy to power the servers and the other hardware that’s necessary. There’s nothing automatic about that choice. That’s a pretty weighty political decision to do something like that. So, that begs the question, okay, what is driving us to embrace AI as the future that we want to have? I would argue it comes back to our ideas about what it means to be a human being and what’s going to be conducive to human health and happiness and flourishing and what it means for us to live together in society. I think new technologies are in part contributing to a revival of this transhumanist ideology. But I also think that just our collective underlying philosophies are primarily what’s driving us. I mentioned this in the lecture: I think transhumanism is an ersatz religion. I think it’s a religious substitute for people living in a secular age.

      Whatever you think of it, religion is a proposed answer to certain recurring questions that I think can’t be suppressed. Questions like, where did I come from? Where am I going? Why am I here? What is the purpose of my life? Why do people suffer or why am I suffering? How can I find happiness and flourishing? How do I contend with the obvious reality of death and mortality? So, religions propose answers to these questions, and regardless of what you think of those answers, people I think are in part attracted to religion because those questions can’t really be suppressed. A secular culture can try to ignore them or can try to pretend that they’re not important or they don’t exist. Don’t worry about all those big philosophical meaning of life questions, just plug in and buy a nicer car and a better microwave oven, and get all your streaming services lined up and have a good time and make more money.

      But for most normally-constituted people, that gets old after a while, and that doesn’t quite do it for them, especially if their wife gets cancer or some major life event happens that reminds them they’re not going to live forever. And if I’m playing the game of life like I’m playing Monopoly, what happens in Monopoly? You try to acquire everything. You try to get all the money and all the assets, and then you win. But at the end of the game, it all goes back in the box. That’s what happens to us. You can try to accumulate all the stuff you want, but then you’re going to die and it all goes back in the box.

      So, I think transhumanism is a substitute religion that will not give people the fulfillment that they’re searching for, but it’s an attempt to answer those questions. No, you don’t have to die. You can live forever. That’s how we’re going to deal with the question of suffering and mortality.

      I’m a Roman Catholic, so I believe in original sin, and I consider this life to be a vale of tears. But it’s great, there are many good things. The world is beautiful, I love the world that God created, but it’s also very broken and I really don’t want to live here forever. That sounds to me like a curse. This is an interesting recurring theme in literature as well. There are many stories in many different literary traditions about how living forever, in this world at least, is a kind of curse. The whole radical life extension project, when you play that tape to the end and when you think through what a life like that would be like – living for 500 years might not sound very attractive at the end of the day.

      *Matt Taibbi: Especially not in a world run by these folks. Thanks, Aaron.*

      *Aaron Kheriaty*: Thank you.

      – - -

      [racket.news/p/on-the-ersatz-re…](►https://www.racket.news/p/on-the-ersatz-religion-of-transhumanism)

      oAnth CC BY
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @gonzo
    gonzo CC BY-NC

    Beverly Hills public schools to consider displaying Israeli flag - Los Angeles Times
    ▻https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-08-26/beverly-hills-public-schools-to-consider-displaying-israeli-flag-on-all-cam

    Drapeau israélien au-dessus des écoles publiques à Berverly Hill...

    The Beverly Hills Unified School District’s Board of Education approved a proposal Tuesday night to display the Israeli flag on all campuses and district facilities in recognition of Jewish American Heritage Month in May.

    The proposal is part of a resolution to combat antisemitism that also calls for educating students about Jewish history and commemorating Holocaust Remembrance Day (Yom HaShoah), International Holocaust Remembrance Day, and Oct. 7 as a Day of Remembrance of the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel.

    The resolution passed in a 3-2 vote, with board President Rachelle Marcus voting no due to fears that displaying the Israeli flag would make schools a target. Board member Amanda Stern voted no because she does not believe “partisan material” such as a national flag belongs in a public school resolution.

    The resolution was introduced earlier this month and sparked fierce debate over whether it is appropriate to dedicate so much time and so many resources to recognizing a specific ethnic and religious group in a public school setting.

    It has also raised concerns that displaying the Israeli flag doesn’t simply signal support for the Jewish people but also represents support for the Israeli government and its actions in Gaza, where more than half a million people are living in famine amid the ongoing war.

    “This proposal conflates Jewish faith and identity with the political actions of a foreign government and undermines the inclusive and respectful environment that public schools are meant to foster for all students, regardless of their background,” Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the Los Angeles chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said in a statement. “It is deeply insensitive and distressing to Palestinian students who have lost countless family members to Israel’s violent military campaign and the man-made humanitarian crisis in Gaza.”

    gonzo CC BY-NC
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @hlc
    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY

    Gavin Newsom’s latest rebranding effort is available to download - Los Angeles Times
    ▻https://www.latimes.com/california/newsletter/2025-04-01/gavin-newsom-podcast-charlie-kirk-maga-2028-election-essential-california?s

    https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/7ea0971/2147483647/strip/true/crop/6000x3150+0+431/resize/1200x630!/quality/75/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalifornia-times-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2F13%2F49%2F779fcfe74ea296fea8243e496485%2Fcalifornia-governor-vogue-world-hollywood-93821.jpg

    Il y a un côté assez fascinant de voir comment les « figures » démocrates s’empressent de singer le trumpisme. Et Le LA Times qui parle tranquillement « d’atténuer la forte polarisation de notre pays ».... comme si ce qui se passait n’était pas un coup d’Etat institutionnel ?
    Il faut dire que sous pression de son propriétaire, le LATimes avait refusé de prendre parti (i.e. pour Kamala Harris) lors des dernières élections. Tout ça se discute entre gens biens, avec les cadors de l’extrême droite US...
    Heureusement qu’il nous reste Bernie et Alexandria Ocasio Cortez...

    By Ryan FonsecaStaff Writer
    April 1, 2025 6:30 AM PT

    Good morning. Here’s what you need to know to start your day.

    Newsom has a lot to say about his ‘toxic’ party.
    As children are pulled into immigration court, many must fend for themselves.
    Nine affordable lunch spots in L.A. for a meal that costs $15 or less.
    And here’s today’s e-newspaper.

    Newsom goes full podcaster

    Since everyone and their mother has a podcast these days, it’s not too surprising that California Gov. Gavin Newsom dove into the space with the recent launch of “This Is Gavin Newsom.”

    “It’s time to have honest discussions with people who agree AND disagree with us,” the show description states. “It’s time to answer the hard questions and be open to criticism, and debate without demeaning or dehumanizing one other.”

    Just a few episodes in, Newsom’s venture has quickly garnered both criticism and kudos. Some on the left feel betrayed by the prominent liberal leader’s willingness to sit down with major MAGA personalities and break from Democratic talking points on some polarizing issues. Other political thinkers view his approach as a much-needed attempt to soften the nation’s stark polarization — and\or the latest vehicle for Newsom’s own political ambitions.

    “A common takeaway from the podcast is that Newsom is attempting to shape-shift into a moderate as he gears up to run for president in the aftermath of the Democratic Party’s disastrous 2024 election,” Times reporter Taryn Luna explained this week.
    A group of people stand to applaud
    California Gov. Gavin Newsom, center right, applauds as Kamala Harris speaks during the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 2024.
    (Paul Sancya / Associated Press)

    What does Newsom talk about on his podcast?

    Newsom takes his party to task as he shares space with some of MAGA’s biggest names.

    In the inaugural episode, the governor hosted MAGA activist Charlie Kirk and quickly found himself in a political firestorm after saying transgender women’s participation in sports is “deeply unfair.”

    In subsequent episodes Newsom sat down with conservative commentator Michael Savage, and later with former Trump advisor Steve Bannon.
    Photo collage of three men
    From left, Charlie Kirk, Gavin Newsom and Steve Bannon.
    (Associated Press)

    Newsom defends his show as critiques fly

    Critics accused him of platforming right-wing voices in a misguided attempt at centrism.

    “He has always been more or less a tech bro from Northern California with the same kind of politics as we thought,” Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, told Taryn. “He’s done playing liberal and now he’s just going to be himself.”

    While his conservative guests made reliable jabs at Democrats and their policies, Newsom has also been critical of his party — both on his show and in other media.

    In an interview with Taryn, Newsom said Democrats had “lost our way” and are suffering the consequences of their “toxic” brand.

    “Our party’s getting our ass kicked … people don’t think we make any damn sense,” he said. “They don’t think we have their values. They think we’re elite. We talk down to people. We talk past people. They think we just think we’re smarter than other people, that we’re so judgmental and full of ourselves.”
    A man in a hat pats another man on the back
    President Trump and California Gov. Gavin Newsom walk to speak to reporters after arriving on Air Force One at Los Angeles International Airport.
    (Mark Schiefelbein / Associated Press)

    It’s not as if Newsom is the only liberal popping the hood to diagnose Democrats’ problems and try to get them back on the road to victory for 2026’s midterm and 2028’s general elections.

    New York Times opinion columnist Ezra Klein has been on a media tour dissecting liberalism’s governing failures, with a special focus on the Golden State. He was the guest on Newsom’s show last week, where the two talked bureaucracy, CEQA and California’s grand plan for high-speed rail that’s running at least a decade behind schedule.

    “There is something wrong in a [political] culture that so often fails to deliver what it promises,” Klein said during their conversation.

    A ‘Joe Rogan of the left’?

    Times columnist Anita Chabria wrote recently that the early episodes of Newsom’s podcast were “cringe” and “appalling,” but added that the governor’s effort was “undeniably smart.”

    “He understands there is a new political order, and it’s not about rising through the ranks of the party or appeasing a base,” she argued. “It’s about audience, politics aside, and Newsom is savvy enough to chase it.”

    Fellow columnist Mark Z. Barabak was less impressed.

    “If Newsom really hopes to be president someday, the best thing he could do is a bang-up job in his final 22 months as governor. Not waste time on glib and self-flattering diversions,” he wrote last month. “People have told Newsom as much. But the only voice he seems to care about [is] his own.”

    Kambiz Akhavan, managing director for the USC Dornsife Center for the Political Future, views Newsom’s foray into podcasting as an effort to “[position] himself as the Joe Rogan of the left.”

    He doesn’t view that as a bad thing.

    “Podcasts are a powerful way to get inside people’s heads with long-form substantive content that is largely absent from our TikTok, 30-second, dopamine-hit, doom-scrolling media diets,” Akhavan wrote in an emailed comment. “Reaching across the aisle to explore issues and talk respectfully across differences is a welcome treat in our polarized society.”

    #Podcast #Gavin_Newsom #Californie #Politique_USA #Démocrates #Modérés_de_droite

    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @monolecte
    Monolecte 😷🤬 CC BY-NC-SA
    11
    @gao_tumbuktu
    @sombre
    @odilon
    @biggrizzly
    @mfmb
    @simplicissimus
    @7h36
    @ericw
    @mona
    @colporteur
    @kassem
    11

    Los Angeles Officials Made the Horrific Fires So Much Worse | The New Republic
    ▻https://newrepublic.com/post/189997/los-angeles-fire-fighting-budget-wildfires

    https://images.newrepublic.com/bb9654c47515b0968d7468f3548e6bd2a85dc570.jpeg?w=1200&h=630&crop=faces&fit=crop&fm=jpg

    Des catastrophes pas si naturelles.

    Los Angeles authorities have evacuated some 30,000 people as of Wednesday, as flames tear through the Pacific Palisades, threatening more than 10,000 homes. And even though the fires are literally in its own backyard, Los Angeles hasn’t exactly prioritized its ability to respond to the fiery devastation.

    The city’s 2024–2025 budget slashed about $17.6 million from the fire department, while increasing the budget for the city’s police force by $126 million, according to figures from the Los Angeles City Administrative Office.

    Exactly why the fire department was deprioritized amid escalating wildfire seasons is unclear, but the unfortunate budget decision comes at a time when state firefighting reserves are also facing the heat. Depending on the year, low-wage incarcerated inmates compose somewhere between 30 and 40 percent of the firefighters with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection—but their ranks within the reserve have been drained by the Covid-19 pandemic, according to the Los Angeles Times.

    Monolecte 😷🤬 CC BY-NC-SA
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @hlc
    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY
    1
    @colporteur
    1

    Cities are pushing back on AI-powered software used to raise rents - Los Angeles Times
    ▻https://www.latimes.com/california/newsletter/2024-12-16/ai-software-rental-market-essential-california

    https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/da21a50/2147483647/strip/true/crop/4032x2117+0+454/resize/1200x630!/quality/75/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalifornia-times-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2F7d%2Fac%2F3c9ea7dc4939ae2bb4df1d27d44c%2Ffor-rent.jpg

    Sur les algorithmes de maximisation des loyers (pour les propriétaires) qui sont dans le collimateur des pouvoirs publics US.
    Question : comment faire appliquer une interdiction de ces outils qui est pourtant votée par la ville de San Francisco.

    The rise of (and backlash to) AI rental software

    It’s no secret that California’s lack of affordable housing and the slow pace of solutions to the decades-in-the-making crisis continue to crank up the pressure on renters.

    According to some critics, there’s a more recent contributor to rising rents: algorithmic software that some landlords utilize to set prices.

    Popular software from Texas-based company RealPage offers AI revenue management that gives real estate owners suggestions on how much to charge for rent “to maximize their revenue potential.”

    The company also sells an AI tool to screen would-be tenants and “more accurately [select] the most appropriate residents for your property.”

    ProPublica previously reported that the company was using private data to recommend rents and discourage landlords from negotiating prices individually with renters.
    Several people hold up small signs with a frowning emoji and the words “The rent is too damn high.”
    Audience members hold up signs at an L.A. County Board of Supervisors meeting in April.
    (Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)

    Now the feds are looking into RealPage’s practices.

    The U.S. Department of Justice, along with California and seven other states, sued RealPage in August, alleging that the company took part in a pricing alignment scheme “that increased their rent revenue across the board, enabled by the illegal sharing of confidential pricing and supply information.”

    “RealPage replaces competition with coordination,” the lawsuit states. “It substitutes unity for rivalry. It subverts competition and the competitive process. It does so openly and directly — and American renters are left paying the price.”

    The alleged price fixing affected renters in markets throughout California, according to state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, who singled out multifamily buildings in many Southern California counties.

    “Anticompetitive agreements are illegal, whether done by a human or software program,” Bonta said in a news release at the time. “Every day, millions of Californians worry about keeping a roof over their head and RealPage has directly made it more difficult to do so.”

    Some L.A. tenant advocates say the company is partially to blame for the region’s homelessness crisis.

    “Large corporate landlords have used RealPage to collude and inflate rents, affecting not only their own tenants who pay sky-high rents, but also all tenants who have to look for a place to live in a rental market shaped by that collusion,” Rose Lenehan, an organizer with the Los Angeles Tenants Union, told me.

    RealPage has contended that the nation’s well-documented lack of affordable housing is the true source of high rents and accused the media of publishing “false and misleading claims” about the company.

    “RealPage is proud of the role our customers play in providing safe and affordable housing to millions of people,” RealPage Chief Executive and President Dana Jones said in a statement. “Despite the noise, we will continue to innovate with confidence and make sure our solutions continue to benefit residents and housing providers, alike.”
    A For Rent sign posted outside a home
    (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

    Some Golden State cities aren’t waiting on the feds to push back.

    San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors approved a nation-first ban on algorithm-based property management software, including RealPage’s.

    Bans are also being floated by leaders in San Jose and San Diego.

    In September, L.A. City Councilmember Heather Hutt introduced a motion that would require the city’s housing department to report on how many individual landlords and property management groups are using algorithm-based software to set rents, as well as the “feasibility of instituting a ban.” That motion was referred to the council’s housing committee but had not been placed on the agenda as of last week.

    It remains to be seen if federal case will proceed under a Trump presidency.

    Under President Biden, antitrust actions ramped up as the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission took significant action against major industries including Big Tech, the financial services industry and pharmaceutical giants.

    But the incoming Trump administration could have a cooling effect on litigation and prosecutions for antitrust law violations, experts say, similar to what we saw during Trump’s first term.

    On a related note, RealPage said it received notice earlier this month that the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division had closed a criminal probe into the company, though that was separate from the civil lawsuits that were filed and still active.

    “We remain unwavering in our belief that RealPage’s revenue management software benefits both housing providers and residents and that the remaining lawsuits are based on misinformation and baseless allegations,” the company said in a statement.

    #Intelligence_artificielle #Loyers #Los_Angeles #San_Francisco

    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @gao_tumbuktu
    GAO TUMBUKTU
    1
    @gao_tumbuktu
    1
    GAO TUMBUKTU
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @hlc
    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY

    Google’s deal to avoid ‘journalism usage fee’ puts taxpayers on hook - Los Angeles Times
    ▻https://www.latimes.com/california/newsletter/2024-08-30/california-struck-a-deal-with-google-to-fund-local-journalism-journalists-a

    https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/5ab7386/2147483647/strip/true/crop/3477x1825+0+246/resize/1200x630!/quality/75/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalifornia-times-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fe7%2Fdb%2F3a4d2dbf4f70914b4a9825de5ab3%2Fgoogle-showcase-98826.jpg

    Good morning. It’s Friday, Aug. 30. Here’s what you need to know to start your day.

    Why journalists aren’t fans of the deal California struck with Google.
    Michigan surpassed California as the largest cannabis market in the country.
    How to choose the best Hollywood studio tour for you.
    And here’s today’s e-newspaper

    Google and California reach agreement on funding newsrooms. Is it enough?

    A state bill with bipartisan support that aimed to throw a lifeline to California’s struggling news industry is no more.

    In place of the proposed “journalism usage fee” levied on Google and Meta annually to help fund local newsrooms, state officials announced a nearly $250-million public-private partnership wherein Google would pay a fraction of what they might have owed under the proposed law.

    The agreement would also put state taxpayers on the hook for tens of millions. Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, is not part of the deal and state lawmakers are not currently pursuing one with them.

    The proposed deal has torn wider the rift between lawmakers, legacy publishers, smaller digital outlets and the labor groups that represent the state’s journalists, which called the outcome a “shakedown,”
    A man looks at a newspaper
    A pressman looks over a paper for possible print corrections at the Los Angeles Times Olympic Printing Plant on February 15, 2024. The plant closed in March.
    (Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

    What happened?

    The California Journalism Preservation Act, introduced last year by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), received wide support in the state legislature and was modeled off similar fee structures developed in Australia and Canada.

    Supporters pointed to the “vise grip” the tech giants have on digital advertising, arguing that Google and Meta swallowed up billions in ad revenue many publications rely on to fund their journalism.

    State Sen. Steve Glazer introduced a related proposal this year, seeking to charge Big Tech a “data extraction mitigation fee” that would fund tax credits for news organizations to hire more reporters.

    Full transparency: Clearly I and fellow L.A. Times journalists have a stake in these efforts. Our unit is part of the Media Guild of the West, which represents hundreds of state news workers and endorsed both bills.

    Meta and Google opposed the bills, funding a major ad campaign (you may have seen it during the Olympics) and threatening to pull news content from their platforms. Meta actually did that in Canada rather than pay news organizations.

    Wicks told me uncertainty had grown in recent weeks about whether Gov. Gavin Newsom would sign her bill. She also worried it could face years of legal challenges. She said her options were: “this or nothing.”

    “From my perspective, this deal that we landed is the largest deal that we were going to get for today,” she said.

    What’s in the deal?

    The state would establish a nonprofit News Transformation Fund, to be administered by UC Berkeley’s School of Journalism.

    Google would pitch in nearly $173 million over five years, according to a framework document shared by Wicks’ office. But the majority of the company’s contributions would not go directly to fund local newsrooms.

    Under the five-year framework, Google would pay:

    $55 million into the journalism fund, $15 million of that in the first year
    A separate $50 million to boost funding for the company’s existing journalism programs
    Google would also funnel nearly $68 million into a separate fund for artificial intelligence research, including a “National AI Accelerator.”

    Details of that AI research are vague and were not part of Wicks’ initial bill. She said the goal would be to “create tools that actually help and augment [but] not replace or replicate journalism.”

    California (aka taxpayers) would pay $70 million into the journalism fund — $30 million in 2025 and $10 million each of the following four years — into the journalism fund. No public dollars will go toward AI development, Wicks emphasized. The framework states that investments could increase based on available state and private funds.

    The agreement is not a tax on Google, has no enforcement mechanism and only outlines funding for five years. And it appears Google’s contributions to the journalism fund would be tax deductible, according to Wick’s office.

    In contrast, Canada’s government passed a law last year under which Google agreed to pay news organizations there $74 million U.S. dollars every year, with no term limit.

    Sen. Glazer released a statement calling Google’s contributions “completely inadequate” and said the agreement “seriously undercuts our work toward a long term solution to rescue independent journalism.”

    ‘A huge missed opportunity’

    While Wicks, Newsom, Google executives and the state’s publishing lobby lauded the agreement, many organizations that represent California journalists are not happy.

    Media Guild of the West blasted the agreement, saying worker groups were cut out of an “undemocratic and secretive deal.”

    “The future of journalism should not be decided in backroom deals,” media labor leaders wrote in a joint letter to state lawmakers. “The Legislature embarked on an effort to regulate monopolies and failed terribly. Now we question whether the state has done more harm than good.”

    Wicks did not address why news workers unions were not involved in the final deal, but contended the California News Publishers Association is the key player in state policy related to publishing issues and was best positioned to negotiate with Google.

    For tech writer Brian Merchant, the deal “represents a huge missed opportunity to meaningfully claw back some of the power that tech monopolies like Google and Facebook have solidified over our information ecosystem.”

    Merchant is a former columnist for The Times and author of “Blood in the Machine,” which chronicles the 19th century Luddite movement and traces it to the growing pushback on Big Tech today (he also writes a newsletter by the same name).

    He pinned the fate of Wicks’ bill on Newsom’s “cold political calculus.”

    “Google is a major power broker in Silicon Valley and in California, and Gavin Newsom did not want to pick a fight with them at this point in time,” Merchant said. “He would rather not alienate … Silicon Valley and its prospective donor base than come out swinging to try to save California’s news industry.”
    A protester holds a picket sign
    Members of the community fill De La Guerra Plaza in front of the Santa Barbara News-Press newspaper’s office during a rally on July 18, 2006. The Pulitzer Prize-winning Santa Barbara News-Press, one of California’s oldest newspapers, ceased publishing after its owner declared the 150-year-old publication bankrupt.
    (Michael A. Mariant / Associated Press)

    What will this mean for the state’s struggling newsrooms?

    The deal still needs to be approved by the state legislature and there are a lot of unknowns — including how much money each news publication would receive through the distribution formula outlined in the deal.

    Wicks called the agreement “a down payment” and expressed hope that it represents “the floor, not the ceiling” in an ongoing effort to get Big Tech to pay news publishers their fair share.

    But Merchant believes the “toothless deal” won’t achieve anything meaningful, other than “continuing the race to the bottom that these tech companies set in motion.”

    “Google is going to continue to capture an outsized share of the ad market, buffeted by the work that human creators produce,” he said. “It will put more AI in play that could potentially serve as a direct competitor to some of the remaining journalists out there, lowering the quality of actual human-collected news.”

    This all comes as the industry continues a decades-long decline, with fewer reporters in hollowed-out newsrooms as subscriptions and web traffic dip. When communities don’t have rigorous news media keeping tabs on people with power, corruption and misinformation can flourish. Residents — often marginalized to begin with — are the ones who pay the price.

    The best way to support the local journalism that you value is with a paid subscription or donation. Maybe that’s The Times or maybe it’s one of the hundreds of other print and digital publications across the state that help you understand the challenges and triumphs of your community and the forces that shape it.

    #Journalisme #Californie #Google #Financement #Publicité

    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @monolecte
    Monolecte 😷🤬 CC BY-NC-SA
    3
    @vazi
    @biggrizzly
    @stephane_m
    3

    Here’s what happened when L.A. residents were given $1,000 a month - Los Angeles Times
    ►https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-07-31/study-details-what-happened-when-la-residents-were-guaranteed-1000-dollars-

    https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/ae371ba/2147483647/strip/true/crop/3900x2048+0+276/resize/1200x630!/quality/75/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalifornia-times-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fe8%2F72%2Fdc52e55a436fb2e5fd6467cd83bc%2F1469120-me-guaranteed-basic-income-program-02-ajs.jpg

    Some of L.A.’s poorest families received cash assistance of $1,000 a month as part of a 12-month pilot project launched nearly three years ago. There were no strings attached and they could use the money however they saw fit.

    Now, a new study finds that the city-funded program was overwhelmingly beneficial.

    Participants in the program experienced a host of financial benefits, according to an analysis co-authored by University of Pennsylvania and UCLA researchers. Beyond that, the study found, the initiative gave people the time and space to make deeper changes in their lives. That included landing better jobs, leaving unsafe living conditions and escaping abusive relationships.

    “If you are trapped in financial scarcity, you are also trapped in time scarcity,” Dr. Amy Castro, co-founder of the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Guaranteed Income Research, told The Times. “There’s no time for yourself; there’s no time for your kids, your neighbors or anybody else.”

    #pauvreté #poverty

    Monolecte 😷🤬 CC BY-NC-SA
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @cdb_77
    CDB_77
    4
    @colporteur
    @rezo
    @lyco
    @fonkisifou
    4
    @karine4

    Study details ‘transformative’ results from L.A. pilot that guaranteed families $1,000 a month

    Some of L.A.’s poorest families received cash assistance of $1,000 a month as part of a 12-month pilot project launched nearly three years ago. There were no strings attached and they could use the money however they saw fit.

    Now, a new study finds that the city-funded program was overwhelmingly beneficial.

    Participants in the program experienced a host of financial benefits, according to an analysis co-authored by University of Pennsylvania and UCLA researchers. Beyond that, the study found, the initiative gave people the time and space to make deeper changes in their lives. That included landing better jobs, leaving unsafe living conditions and escaping abusive relationships.

    “If you are trapped in financial scarcity, you are also trapped in time scarcity,” Dr. Amy Castro, co-founder of the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Guaranteed Income Research, told The Times. “There’s no time for yourself; there’s no time for your kids, your neighbors or anybody else.”

    The Basic Income Guaranteed: Los Angeles Economic Assistance Pilot, or BIG:LEAP, disbursed $38.4 million in city funds to 3,200 residents who were pregnant or had at least one child, lived at or below the federal poverty level and experienced hardship related to COVID-19. Participants were randomly selected from about 50,000 applicants and received the payments for 12 months starting in 2022. The city paid researchers $3.9 million to help design the trial and survey participants throughout about their experiences.

    Castro and her colleagues partnered with researchers at UCLA’s Fielding School of Public Health to compare the experiences of participants in L.A.’s randomized control trial — the country’s first large-scale guaranteed-income pilot using public funds — with those of nearly 5,000 people who didn’t receive the unconditional cash.

    Researchers found that participants reported a meaningful increase in savings and were more likely to be able to cover a $400 emergency during and after the program. Guaranteed-income recipients also were more likely to secure full-time or part-time employment, or to be looking for work, rather than being unemployed and not looking for work, the study found.

    “Instead of taking the very first job that was available, that might not have been a lasting, good fit for the family, [the participants were] saying, ‘Hold on a minute, I have a moment to sit and think and breathe, and think about where I want my family to be,’ ” said Dr. Stacia West, also a co-founder of the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Guaranteed Income Research.

    In a city with sky-high rents, participants reported that the guaranteed income functioned as “a preventative measure against homelessness,” according to the report, helping them offset rental costs and serving as a buffer while they waited for other housing support.

    It also prevented or reduced the incidence of intimate partner violence, the analysis found, by making it possible for people and their children to leave and find other housing. Intimate partner violence is an intractable social challenge, Castro said, so to see improvements with just 12 months of funding is a “pretty extraordinary change.”

    People who had struggled to maintain their health because of inflexible or erratic work schedules and lack of child care reported that the guaranteed income provided the safety net they needed to maintain healthier behaviors, the report said. They reported sleeping better, exercising more, resuming necessary medications and seeking mental health therapy for themselves and their children.

    Compared with those who didn’t receive cash, guaranteed income recipients were more likely to enroll their kids in sports and clubs during and after the pilot.
    LOS ANGELES, CA - DECEMBER 28, 2023 - Martha Lopez Dubon, 39, spends a light moment with her daughters Sofia Fuentes, 6, left, and Lizzy Fuentes, 9, while waiting for customers at The Dubon Store in Los Angeles on December 28, 2023. Lopez is a recipient of the Basic Income Guaranteed: Los Angeles Economic Assistance Pilot, or BIG: LEAP. Lopez, an immigrant from Honduras who began selling clothing in the street at the beginning of the pandemic. When Lopez started receiving the $1,000 payments from the BIG: LEAP program in February 2022, she used half to pay rent. She saved the other half, with the goal of opening her own clothing store which she now operates. In 2022, the city of Los Angeles launched the Basic Income Guaranteed: Los Angeles Economic Assistance Pilot, or BIG: LEAP. Through the program, 3,200 low-income people received monthly payments of $1,000 - and there were no restrictions on how the money could be spent. (Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

    Los Angeles resident Ashley Davis appeared at a news conference Tuesday about the study findings and said that her health improved because she could afford to buy fruits, vegetables and smoothies. Before, she was pre-diabetic and “my cholesterol was going through the roof,” Davis said.

    “I was neglecting my own needs,” said Davis, who described herself as a single mother of a special-needs child. She switched careers and is now studying to be a nurse, she said.

    Abigail Marquez, general manager of the Community Investment for Families Department, which helped oversee BIG:LEAP, said she’s spent 20 years working on various anti-poverty programs.

    “I can say confidently that this is by far the most transformative program,” Marquez said.

    BIG:LEAP was one of the largest of more than 150 guaranteed-income pilot programs launched nationwide in recent years. The program was funded through the city budget and included $11 million that city leaders moved from the Police Department budget in response to nationwide protests after the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer in 2020.

    Despite the positive research findings, programs like BIG:LEAP have raised concerns among some taxpayer groups.

    “It’s simply wrong for the city government to take tax dollars earned and paid by people who are trying to pay their own bills and transfer that money to other people chosen by the government to receive it,” the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. said in a statement. “Guaranteed-income programs are appropriately funded voluntarily by charitable organizations and foundations, not forcibly through the tax code.”

    Councilmember Curren Price, whose South Los Angeles district includes some of the city’s most impoverished neighborhoods, introduced a motion Tuesday to continue a version of the pilot with a focus on people in abusive relationships and young adults in need of mental health and emotional support.

    Price said he would contribute $1 million toward the next phase from his council funds. Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez also pledged $1 million.

    Beyond that, it’s not clear where the next round of funding would come from. Price expressed hope the city would continue to support the effort through the general budget.

    “I don’t know how realistic it is that it’s going to be $40 million again,” Price said. “But I think it’s realistic that we could receive something.”

    ►https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-07-31/study-details-what-happened-when-la-residents-were-guaranteed-1000-dollars-

    #revenu_de_base #rdb #revenu_universel #ça_marche #pauvreté #efficacité #Los_Angeles #USA #Etats-Unis #lutte_contre_la_pauvreté #argent #temps

    ping @karine4

    CDB_77
    • @cdb_77
      CDB_77

      Report: Landmark guaranteed income program in City of Los Angeles produces “overwhelmingly positive” results

      Groundbreaking study demonstrates impact of direct cash over a 12-month period, showing increased ability of recipients to exit intimate partner violence, decreased food insecurity, and improved quality of life across a number of additional domains.

      Philadelphia, PA — City of Los Angeles residents who received $1000 monthly cash payments for a year as part of the Basic Income Guaranteed: Los Angeles Economic Assistance Pilot (BIG:LEAP) program reported positive trends in financial well-being, food security, intimate partner violence, parenting, sense of community, and reduced fear of community violence.

      “BIG:LEAP participants experienced overwhelmingly positive outcomes with the infusion of unconditional cash,”write the authors of a new report produced by the Center for Guaranteed Income Research (CGIR) at Penn’s School of Social Policy & Practice (SP2), in partnership with The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Fielding School of Public Health.

      The program provided a guaranteed income (GI) to 3,200 households living in deep poverty within Los Angeles, California, the second largest and most unaffordable city in the country. Implemented by the city’s Community Investment for Families Department (CIFD) and supported by the city’s general fund with investments from local council district leaders, BIG:LEAP serves as an example of a government-led direct cash program executed at a large scale with public resources and infrastructure.

      According to the report’s authors, BIG:LEAP marks a number of milestones — the first large-scale randomized controlled trial of unconditional cash positioned to determine how much change can occur in recipients’ lives within a 12-month period, the largest GI study that has concluded since the U.S. government’s experiments with income tax in the 1960s and 1970s, and the first GI study since the 1970s to consider intimate partner violence and community violence.

      “The City of Los Angeles is working urgently to provide Angelenos with economic opportunities and resources in our efforts to alleviate poverty throughout L.A. These are encouraging results and I’m looking forward to expanding this program in more stable economic times. We must continue to implement creative solutions to the challenges we face and I look forward to continuing that work with locked arms,” says City of Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass.

      Michael D. Tubbs, founder of Mayors for a Guaranteed Income (MGI), says, “Every day, folks are working hard and doing their part, yet still falling short. Guaranteed income gives them the flexibility to meet their families’ needs and the stability to reach for a better future.” MGI is a coalition of over 125 mayors committed to advancing a federal guaranteed income.

      Part of a series of CGIR publications collectively named The American Guaranteed Income Studies, the report found that despite extreme financial pressures and profound effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, recipients benefited from GI in several ways over the duration of the program:

      - Improved safety and autonomy — GI recipients reported reduced severity and frequency of intimate partner violence (IPV), with recipients using GI to prevent and exit circumstances of IPV.
      - Strengthened sense of community — GI recipients were considerably more likely to report reduced fear of neighborhood violence and increased positive interactions with neighbors.
      - Improved financial well-being — GI recipients demonstrated a significantly increased ability to cover a $400 emergency compared to the control group.
      - Enhanced food security — GI recipients showed a notable decrease in food insecurity and an increase in health-promoting behaviors.
      – Increased enrichment for children — Compared to those in the control group, parents receiving GI were significantly more likely to maintain their children’s extracurricular activities and reported more time for parenting.

      “In Los Angeles, a city of extreme wealth and extreme poverty, the opportunities for upward economic mobility can seem out of reach,” write the researchers, Drs. Bo-Kyung Elizabeth Kim, Amy Castro, Stacia West, and colleagues. “BIG:LEAP, the largest GI program at its time of launch, represented a bold and significant investment to provide economic security and a solid foundation for mobility to a diverse group of caregivers with children.”

      Los Angeles City Councilmember Curren Price proposed the pilot in 2021. “Through this program, we witnessed transformation beyond measure. BIG:LEAP didn’t just help Angelenos address health issues, school expenses, childcare, or emergency needs; it empowered participants to start businesses, move into their own homes, and reclaim hope from despair,” says Price. “The undeniable impact of programs like BIG:LEAP speaks volumes—it has the power to rewrite destinies and is vital for a brighter future.”

      Adds Council President Pro-tem Marqueece Harris-Dawson, “The BIG:LEAP program offers significant change for some and life-altering benefits for others. The data underscores its effectiveness and success in improving health and wellbeing, and stability for all who participated.”

      To qualify, participants were required to be at least 18 years old, have at least one dependent within the household or be expecting a child, be financially or medically impacted by COVID-19, and fall below the federal poverty threshold. Researchers measured participant impact against a randomized control group of 4,992 other residents who did not receive payments, though both study groups were compensated for completing surveys and interviews.

      One participant commented, “[BIG:LEAP] saved my life really … I’d probably be living on the streets. I probably would have had my kids taken … it gave me a sense of security instead of always wondering if I’m gonna be able to get money for the next meal.”

      The researchers say the study’s “remarkable” results suggest GI programs could serve as critical and commonsense approaches to supporting families and communities. “As the country, led by individual municipalities and innovative … leaders, moves toward shoring up the porous social safety net, GI appears to be an effective strategy to promote overall health and well-being,” the authors write.

      About the Center for Guaranteed Income Research

      The Center for Guaranteed Income Research (CGIR) is an applied research center specializing in cash-transfer research, evaluation, pilot design, and narrative change. CGIR provides mixed-methods expertise in designing and executing empirical guaranteed income studies that work alongside the existing safety net. Headed by its founding directors, Drs. Amy Castro and Stacia West, CGIR is housed at the School of Social Policy & Practice at the University of Pennsylvania.

      About Penn’s School of Social Policy & Practice (SP2)

      For more than 110 years, the University of Pennsylvania School of Social Policy & Practice (SP2) has been a powerful force for good in the world, working towards social justice and social change through research and practice. SP2 contributes to the advancement of more effective, efficient, and humane human services through education, research, and civic engagement. The School offers five top-ranked, highly respected degree programs along with a range of certificate programs and dual degrees. SP2’s transdisciplinary research centers and initiatives — many collaborations with Penn’s other professional schools — yield innovative ideas and better ways to shape policy and service delivery. The passionate pursuit of social innovation, impact, and justice is at the heart of the School’s knowledge-building activities.

      ▻https://sp2.upenn.edu/report-landmark-guaranteed-income-program-in-city-of-los-angeles-produces
      #sécurité_alimentaire #alimentation #autonomie #sécurité #bien-être

      #rapport

      CDB_77
    • @cdb_77
      CDB_77

      #Center_for_Guaranteed_Income_Research

      The Center for Guaranteed Income Research (CGIR) is an applied research center specializing in cash-transfer research, evaluation, pilot design, and narrative change. We provide mixed-methods expertise in designing and executing empirical guaranteed income studies that work alongside the existing safety net. CGIR’s team, headed by its Founding Directors, Dr. Amy Castro and Dr. Stacia West, led the design and research for the Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration (SEED), and currently serve as the centralized research partners for Mayors for a Guaranteed Income (MGI). Dr. Castro and Dr. West have 20 combined years of experience in research, advocacy, and social work practice on economic justice, asset building, and cash-transfers.

      ▻https://www.penncgir.org
      #justice_économique

      CDB_77
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @hlc
    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY

    How dirty is your weed ? Joint investigation finds toxic pesticides - Los Angeles Times
    ▻https://www.latimes.com/california/newsletter/2024-06-17/cannabis-investigation-la-times-weedweek-toxic-pot-essential-california

    https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/fce60e6/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2998x1574+0+213/resize/1200x630!/quality/75/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalifornia-times-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2F60%2F37%2F51012ec44eb28b07a38de2c64e0c%2Fdirty-weed-3x2.jpg

    Une nouvelle industrie agro-alimentaire... donc un concentré de dangers (pesticides) et de l’absence réelle de régulation (test) et de
    contraintes suites à des études... idem sur le rôle des lobbies de cette nouvelle industrie pour circonvenir les régulateurs.

    Good morning. It’s Monday, June 17. Here’s what you need to know to start your day.

    Weed is legal and (technically) regulated in California. That doesn’t mean it’s safe.
    A wildfire near Gorman has burned around 15,000 acres and sparked evacuations.
    A new play reckons with a racist chapter of Palm Spring’s history.
    And here’s today’s e-newspaper.

    How dirty is your weed?

    Weed is legal and subject to regulation in the Golden State. But as a joint investigation (it was right there) by The Times and cannabis industry newsletter WeedWeek found, that doesn’t mean it’s safe, as California regulators are often failing to get contaminated cannabis products off shelves.

    The Times and WeedWeek purchased dozens of cannabis products from retail stores, then tested them at private labs. Out of 42 products tested, 25 had concentrations of pesticides above either state-allowed levels or current federal standards for tobacco.

    “The contaminants include chemicals tied to cancer, liver failure, thyroid disease and genetic and neurologic harm to users and unborn children,” Times reporter Paige St. John and WeedWeek editor Alex Halperin wrote in a subscriber exclusive. “Most of the pesticides found were in low concentrations that risk long-term harm by repeated use, though the extent of the health threat may not be known for years.”

    However, the testing did show that vapes from five popular brands had levels of pesticides above federal risk thresholds for harm from a single exposure as set by the Environmental Protection Agency.

    There are 66 pesticides California requires testing for, but it’s an outdated list, unchanged in roughly six years. There are many more not included on the state’s list that have been linked to liver cancer, reproductive disorders and more.
    Cannabis vape cartridge boxes
    Cannabis vape cartridge companies CUREpen, Flavored, Panda Pen, Phire and Dime Industries were tested for harmful chemicals on Jan. 30, 2024, in El Segundo.
    (Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

    One piece of the problem: Major gaps in regulation “leave policing of the industry largely in the hands of labs financially beholden to the companies whose products they test,” Paige and Alex wrote. “Legislation to require independent fraud and accuracy checks has remained stalled in Sacramento for two years amid backroom negotiations between industry players and regulators.”

    Where are state regulators in all this? Mostly silent.

    California’s Department of Cannabis Control has yet to propose new regulations, despite years of requests to test for more pesticides.

    The department’s director, Nicole Elliott, “declined to be interviewed on the extent of the pesticide threat,” Paige and Alex noted. Some members of her team did talk, though.

    “Employees, who spoke on condition of anonymity, complained of a lack of willingness within the agency to take a hard line on pesticide contamination,” Paige and Alex wrote. “One said she was schooled on the importance of ‘not disrupting the market.’”

    And that market is huge, as is the potential profit. With billions of consumer dollars out there, it’s not surprising corners were cut — or, more accurately, deadly poison sprayed, to grow more weed more quickly.

    Compounding the problem is the lack of data on cannabis’ health effects. That’s due in large part to the federal government’s current classification of marijuana as among dangerous drugs including heroin and LSD, which limits its medical research. That could change soon, though, as the U.S Department of Justice recently proposed reclassifying marijuana.

    The state of the industry is also hurting small growers. Paige and Alex spoke with Mary Gaterud, who has grown marijuana on her Humboldt County farm for decades.

    “The people who are doing it right get crushed,” she told them. “The bad actors are encouraged and rewarded. And the consumers are poisoned while being told they are safe.”

    You can read the in-depth reporting from Paige St. John and Alex Halperin in our subscriber exclusive here. And there’s more from this investigation below:

    Here’s how we tested weed products for pesticides.
    A look at how contaminated weed can affect the human body.
    This graphic shows how good weed goes bad.

    #Cannabis #Agro-alimentaire #Régulation #Pesticides

    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @hlc
    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY

    Once-modest California towns become surprising ’million-dollar cities’ - Los Angeles Times
    ▻https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-04-15/california-home-values-climbing-million-dollar-cities

    https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/bb2d579/2147483647/strip/true/crop/5280x2772+0+592/resize/1200x630!/quality/75/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalifornia-times-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2F8e%2F95%2Fadab2cb043528b948f2e1cfcd92e%2F1434995-me-calif-home-values-million-dollar-cities-17-ajs.jpg

    Les « million dollar cities » sont des villes dans lesquelles le revenu médian annuel est supérieur à 1M$.
    Il y en a 550 aux Etats-Unis, dont 210 en Californie.

    The list of million-dollar cities in California has grown

    Do you live in Bonita, Tustin or San Gabriel? If so, congratulations! These once-modest towns have joined the list of California’s “million-dollar cities.”

    A “million-dollar city” is any community, town or city where the median value of a home is at least $1 million. And California, as of February, has 210 of them, up 15 from the last count in 2023.

    There are currently 550 “million-dollar cities” in the U.S., according to Zillow. California’s share includes cities you’d guess: Beverly Hills, Malibu, Newport Beach and Santa Monica.

    But it now also includes cities that until recently were known for their humble working-class stature. California’s rookie “million-dollar cities” include: Bonita, Tustin, Brea, San Gabriel, Cerritos, Orange, San Luis Obispo, Placentia, Cambria, Thousand Oaks, Pala, Pleasant Hill, Arroyo Grande, Bonsall and Cypress.

    That’s not the only way to see how housing costs across the state are skyrocketing. Five cities — La Cañada Flintridge, Irvine, Laguna Niguel, Laguna Hills and Poway — already on the million-dollar-city list, have seen median housing costs increase 12% to 17% per year.

    Times data reporter Terry Castleman created two maps that help decipher how California’s housing affordability crisis has transformed the state.
    Map showing the 210 California cities where median home values exceed $1 million.

    Almost all of California’s “million-dollar cities” are coastal. This isn’t surprising. Houses with an ocean view and close proximity to the beach have consistently been sought-after. A majority of California’s residents live in coastal cities.

    In 2020, 26.8 million Californians were living in coastal counties, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Office for Coastal Management. That is 67.8% of the state’s total population that year.

    Limited supply also heightens the issue. In San Diego County’s unincorporated community of Bonita, for example, surging demand, coupled with limits on construction, “may have also contributed to spiking home values,” Terry noted.

    The list’s noncoastal towns are scarce and include Indian Wells ($1.3 million), Tahoe City ($1.1 million), Truckee ($1 million), Granite Bay ($1.1 million) and Homewood ($1.1 million).
    Map showing housing values rose fastest in Southern California cities over past 5 years

    Statewide, the median home price increased 33.5% over the last five years. Last year, California’s median home value shot up to $789,000 — a 3.1% increase over a year prior.

    According to census data, California’s median household income rose from $71,805 in 2017 to $91,551 in 2022 — about a 27.5% increase. Although this is not the same time period as above, statewide median household earnings do not increase parallel to median house values.

    Nationwide, homes are worth 5.6 times more than the median household income — a record high from the previous 4-1 ratio — as of 2022, according to Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. California, however, leads the pack as median home values across the state are at least 10 times more than median household earnings.

    In Southern California, the unfortunate amalgamation of soaring housing prices, stagnant household incomes and high mortgage interest rates have created the most unaffordable housing market in recent years.

    Many cities with the highest change in median home price (51% or more) over five years are in Southern California. The change is especially drastic in cities that used to be affordable for middle-income families.

    Median home prices grew by 12% per year in Tustin and Bonita, according to Zillow. In Bonita, specifically, median home values have increased by 65% over the last five years.

    Tustin’s median household income is over $100,000. So, according to census data, the average home in Tustin is “worth about 10 times what a household earns,” Terry wrote. The ratio is similar in Bonita.

    Although more cities have vaulted into the seven-figure range, cities that were already on the “million-dollar cities” list continue skyrocketing. (Though there are some notable expectations, such as Palmdale, Sacramento and Bakersfield — all with median home values below $500,000.)

    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @hlc
    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY
    4
    @colporteur
    @monolecte
    @mistercreek
    @kassem
    4

    Column : Musk is the beginning of the end for #BlackTwitter - Los Angeles Times
    ▻https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-25/elon-musk-buying-twitter-will-silence-black-twitter

    https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/caddc6e/2147483647/strip/true/crop/5723x3005+0+995/resize/1200x630!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalifornia-times-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2F95%2F27%2F2bcc7d124c669a45611be9bfab71%2Fap22081531669276.jpg

    Un élément important sur la « liberté d’expression » version Musk : alors qu’il est en procès pour ségrégation dans ses entreprises, il vient d’achetyer Twitter, qui est le principal outil du #BlackTwitter, l’outil d’expression et de mobilisation de la communauté africaine-américaine des Etats-Unis. Une grande peur pour les activistes de #BlackLivesMatter.

    It’s all rather disturbing and yet somehow fitting in these doublespeak-steeped times.

    Elon Musk, the founder of a company that California is suing for allegedly silencing thousands of Black employees who complained about racism, is buying a company that has given millions of Black people a megaphone-like voice to complain about racism.

    And the California-hating billionaire insists he’s doing it all to protect free speech.

    “Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated,” Musk said Monday, announcing that he had succeeded in taking over the San Francisco-based social media company for $44 billion.

    Consider this the beginning of the end of #BlackTwitter.

    Not of Black people on Twitter but of #BlackTwitter — the community of millions that figured out how to turn a nascent social media platform into an indispensable tool for real-world activism, political power and change.

    And entertainment too. Where do you think the best memes and GIFs come from?
    Elon Musk

    Business

    Elon Musk reaches $44-billion deal to buy Twitter

    April 25, 2022

    #BlackTwitter gave us hashtags that turned into movements.

    #BlackLivesMatter and #ICantBreathe became rallying cries for hundreds of thousands of protesters after the 2020 murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police. And for years before that, when fewer Americans were paying attention to the disproportionate number of Black women being killed by police, there was #SayHerName.

    It was #OscarsSoWhite that led to pressure for changes at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. And let’s not forget that #MeToo, which roiled the halls of power in corporations and government, was started by a Black woman.

    There’s also #BlackGirlMagic and #BlackBoyJoy, both celebrations of the beauty of Blackness in a country that so often devalues it — and us.

    On Monday, the mood on #BlackTwitter was neither magical nor joyful.

    “There goes #BlackTwitter — new owners will call it CRT and ban it.”

    “Um… #BlackTwitter we need to schedule a meeting ASAP! Where we meeting up when we leave Twitter?”

    “So, where’s the back of Twitter? Asking for #BlackTwitter”

    “It was nice getting to know you all. Especially everyone on #BlackTwitter. Now a white South African man owns it. Bye Y’all. #RIPTwitter”

    Meredith D. Clark, an associate professor at Northeastern University in Boston who studies race, media and power and is working on a book about #BlackTwitter, wasn’t surprised.

    “I think you will definitely see more people move off in larger waves,” she said. “I think there will still be a remnant left, but you know?”

    The problems with the Twitter deal are multifold for Black people.

    First, there’s Musk himself.

    He’s the world’s richest person. Or, as Clark put it: “This is yet another example of how we’re falling prey to oligarchies. Men with billions of dollars who get to decide what our communications look like.”

    He’s also a businessman with questionable ethics. Musk’s company Tesla is being sued by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. It’s the largest racial discrimination suit ever brought by the state and was filed on behalf of more than 4,000 former and current employees, all of whom are Black.

    Some of those employees described their experiences to The Times. They alleged that they were often the targets of racist slurs by co-workers and supervisors and that Tesla segregated Black workers, gave them the hardest work at the Fremont, Calif., manufacturing plant and denied them promotions. And they say the company ignored their complaints about the treatment.

    Given the long-standing diversity problems at tech companies, including at Twitter, this is troubling. Even more concerning is the climate on Twitter itself, which — despite the content moderation that happens now — is still full of racist trolls.

    “With the knowledge that I have about Musk as a businessperson, and as someone who seeks to have great influence over culture, I’m concerned,” Clark said. “I’m concerned about some of the statements that he’s made in the past and how they reflect on his character and his mind-set.”
    Monica Chatman is a plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit for discrimination and harassment against Tesla

    Business

    Black Tesla employees describe a culture of racism: ‘I was at my breaking point’

    March 25, 2022

    The second problem is what Musk plans to do with Twitter.

    He has repeatedly complained about the content moderation, even though it is applied sparingly and inconsistently. If he has his way, he could very likely get rid of it altogether.

    Prominent white supremacists who got kicked off the platform for good reason could return — among them former President Trump, who, through his account, helped incite the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

    Perhaps more troubling, conspiracy theories could become easier to find and share and, therefore, grow in complexity and number of believers.

    We’ve already seen the effects of disinformation about COVID-19 vaccines and of QAnon, including the latest tall tales linking gender identity to pedophilia that are being echoed by reckless Republican politicians. What happens when those conspiracy theories, bolstered by more than a dash of white supremacy, escalate into violence? It happened once; it can surely happen again.
    FILE - This July 9, 2019, file photo shows a sign outside of the Twitter office building in San Francisco.
    Consider this the beginning of the end of #BlackTwitter, the community of millions that figured out how to turn a social media company into a platform for real-world activism, political power and change.
    (Jeff Chiu / Associated Press)

    #BlackTwitter knows this.

    On Monday, Musk tweeted: “I hope that even my worst critics remain on Twitter because that is what free speech means.”

    #BlackTwitter also knows that, no, that’s not what free speech means, because Twitter is a company — soon to be privately held — and has no obligation under the 1st Amendment to allow racism, transphobia, homophobia or misogyny to percolate through its platform.

    And so, rather than safeguarding the “bedrock of a functioning democracy,” as Musk describes free speech, he just destroyed it — because the people whose tweets were the most effective at that are leaving.

    “I don’t think that you’re going see the same sort of replication of a Twitter-like climate or #BlackTwitter on another platform. I don’t think you’ll ever get that lightning in a bottle back,” Clark said. “But I do think that you will see Black people doing what we have always done. And that is bend communication and other technologies to our needs and our will. And find ways to thrive in those various areas of the internet.”

    #Twitter #Elon_Musk #Black_Lives_Matter

    Articles repérés par Hervé Le Crosnier CC BY
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @thomas_lacroix
    CEPED-MIGRINTER-IC MIGRATIONS-MFO-Monde

    Coronavirus: Appeals court rules ICE doesn’t have to immediately release migrants - Los Angeles Times
    #Covid-19#migrant#migration#US#centrederetention

    ▻https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-05/judge-ordered-ice-release-california-immigrants-overruled-detainees-will-st
    ▻https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/fc7fc3e/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2048x1075+0+145/resize/1200x630!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalifornia-times-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.

    A panel of three 9th Circuit Court of Appeals judges on Tuesday overruled a lower court’s order to significantly reduce the number of detainees held at the Adelanto ICE Processing Facility northeast of Los Angeles.

    CEPED-MIGRINTER-IC MIGRATIONS-MFO-Monde
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @arno
    ARNO* ART LIBRE
    ARNO* ART LIBRE
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @etraces
    e-traces ART LIBRE
    2
    @simplicissimus
    @colporteur
    2

    LAPD to end controversial program that aimed to predict crime - Los Angeles Times
    ▻https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-21/lapd-ends-predictive-policing-program

    Los Angeles Police Chief Michel Moore announced Tuesday that, in light of financial constraints caused by the coronavirus outbreak, the department would stop using a controversial program that predicts where property crimes could occur throughout the city. Critics say the predictive-policing program, called Pred-Pol, has led to heavier policing of minority neighborhoods. Moore has said in the past that he disagrees with the view that the program unfairly targets Latino and black (...)

    #Predpol #algorithme #LAPD #racisme #police #pauvreté #discrimination #prédiction #criminalité

    ##pauvreté ##criminalité
    ▻https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/466cca9/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2048x1075+0+110/resize/1200x630!/quality/90

    e-traces ART LIBRE
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @thomas_lacroix
    CEPED-MIGRINTER-IC MIGRATIONS-MFO-Monde
    CEPED-MIGRINTER-IC MIGRATIONS-MFO-Monde
    Écrire un commentaire
  • @etraces
    e-traces ART LIBRE

    Audit : Privacy rules lacking in California’s use of license plate readers - Los Angeles Times
    ▻https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-02-13/privacy-risks-automatic-license-plate-readers-lapd

    The Los Angeles Police Department and three other California law enforcement agencies have not provided sufficient privacy protections for the hundreds of millions of images collected by automated license plate readers and shared with other jurisdictions, the state auditor said Thursday. Most of the images collected by the devices are unrelated to criminal cases. The audit found that 99.9% of the 320 million images the LAPD stored came from vehicles that were not on a list of those (...)

    #criminalité #automobilistes #vidéo-surveillance #data #discrimination #surveillance #immatriculation #LAPD (...)

    ##criminalité ##police
    ▻https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/2794d86/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2048x1075+0+145/resize/1200x630!/quality/90

    e-traces ART LIBRE
    Écrire un commentaire