




It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)





Elon Musk wants to nickel-and-dime Twitter users for features that were once free just 7 months after saying he 'didn't care about the economics'
Elon Musk is haphazardly suggesting ways to "pay the bills" at Twitter as debt interest payments soon come due.
His approach is starkly different than when he said he "didn't care about the economics" of buying it in April.
Musk has reportedly suggested paid direct messages and "paywalled" videos to advisors as ways to make Twitter more money.
Not long after Elon Musk offered to buy Twitter for $44 billion in April, he said he "didn't care about the economics at all" of the purchase.
"This is just my strong, intuitive sense that having a public platform that is maximally trusted and broadly inclusive is extremely important to the future of civilization," Musk said at the TED2022 conference.
Seven months later, the world's richest man seems to have changed his tune, haphazardly suggesting ideas to his advisors, and even his Twitter followers, in an attempt to make the platform profitable.
Earlier this week, Musk announced that Twitter would begin charging $8 per month for its "blue check" verification program, which was previously free to those who qualified.
"We need to pay the bills somehow!" Musk wrote in a tweet responding to complaints about the fee.
But that's not the only idea Musk has in mind to squeeze cash out of his new company. The New York Times reports that Musk and his advisers have weighed adding a service that would allow users to send direct messages to high-profile users for a fee and "paywalled" videos.
Musk has also considered charging for user analytics and reviving the short-form video platform, Vine, according to his interactions with followers on Twitter.
The rushed attempts to drum up new revenue streams at Twitter are at odds with how Musk spoke about the purchase of the social media platform last spring when he extolled the platform's virtue as a "de facto town square" and compared the Twitter deal to Jeff Bezos' purchase of The Washington Post.
Now, Musk has Twitter employees working 24/7, trying to find a way to make to eke out money from the platform as Twitter will eventually be expected to pay massive interest payments. Musk borrowed $13 billion from banks to partially fund the deal, and the company will have to pay $1 billion in annual interest as a result. Twitter's entire cash flow last year totaled less than $1 billion, according to the Times.
Charging for previously free services isn't the only way Musk has tried to save the company money. On Thursday night and Friday morning, large swaths of Twitter's staff learned they had been laid off, either via email or by simply losing access to their Slack and email accounts.
‘AI is Soulless’: Hollywood Film Workers Strike and Emerging Perceptions of Generative Cinema
In 2023, a good portion of Hollywood went on strike — in part over concerns about artificial intelligence in filmmaking. Now the use of AI has roiled this year’s Academy Awards: Several of the best picture nominees used AI in production. “The Brutalist” showed AI generated architecture blueprints in a scene and its editor used a program called Respeecher to hone actors’ Hungarian pronunciations. “Emelia Peréz” used Respeecher to adjust an actor’s singing voice.
Brett Halperin, a University of Washington doctoral student in human centered design and engineering, interviewed picketing film workers about AI during the 2023 strikes. Their concerns ranged from AI’s effects on wages and jobs to the inauthenticity of the resulting art.
Halperin published the findings Feb. 6 in ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction.
UW News spoke with Halperin about how film workers are thinking about AI and the history of technology in filmmaking.
The striking film workers you spoke with raised various concerns about the use of AI in filmmaking. Were you surprised to see some consternation around the Oscars this year?
Brett Halperin: We have seen backlash to AI from workers and the general public manifest in multiple ways over the past few years — from striking to protesting screenings. Many filmmakers have valid concerns about how studio use of AI can undermine their craft and labor. Meanwhile, many writers and artists object to how their materials are scraped and co-opted as training data for machine learning models without their consent or compensation. This makes AI particularly thorny and controversial. But it’s also important to situate this backlash in the broader historical context.
Throughout history, the “death of cinema” trope has resurfaced with each major technological shift. For example, the use of synchronized sound systems starting in 1926 rendered many silent-era acting techniques, production methods and even professions obsolete. While this caused massive disruption, it ultimately created new professions, such as sound specialists, and transformed rather than eradicated cinema. The rise of color, television, digital media and so on follow similar trajectories. AI presents another iteration of this trope that continues to reflect the shifting cultural and industrial anxieties about technological agency. Part of what makes cinema unique relative to other art forms is that it has always depended on complex, evolving technologies. This change is unsettling, but also an opportunity for all of us, including the Academy, to reevaluate what makes film meaningful.
The Academy is reportedly considering making AI disclosure mandatory for the 2026 Oscars. Do you see value in this?
BH: Generally, I think as much transparency as possible is a good thing. But as AI further integrates into production processes and workflows, excessive mandates could become unreasonably cumbersome and difficult to track. So I would first start by asking: What do we mean by AI? Computer-generated imagery and its associated algorithms have been in the Hollywood studio system since the 1970s. At what point did CGI and other algorithmic tools become rebranded as AI?
In my view, regulation should focus on where AI use has the potential to undermine workers and manipulate viewers. For example, AI actors and de-aging techniques might further intensify body image issues among the public, as well as take work away from actual actors. Disclosure would help the Academy and spectators understand what they are seeing to not only assess the ethics, but also better judge and criticize films in general.
The uses of AI in “The Brutalist” and “Emelia Peréz” are relatively minor. What were workers’ feelings about AI tools as instruments to assist their work, rather than replace it?
BH: The workers did not oppose AI altogether. They seemed to recognize that technological change is an ongoing part of cinema and expressed degrees of openness to the creative possibilities. They acknowledged that there are potentially useful applications insofar as the decision-making power and control over AI lies with them rather than studio executives forcing its integration.
That said, the workers seemed to find current AI-assisted capabilities to be rather unimaginative and unequipped to augment (or replace) their work. For example, a writer who tried to use it to assist him described the written outputs as “hacky” and “generic.” Many of the workers made compelling cases for why AI cannot take over the tasks that truly define filmmaking, such as fostering authentic human connection on and off screen and telling stories that matter to people.
What were your major takeaways from talking with the film workers? Have those changed at all as the technology has evolved in the last year and a half?
BH: Despite being around for decades now in various forms, so-called AI today is exhibiting a “novelty effect,” which is currently exploitable, but bound to fade. As AI further integrates and becomes more deeply embedded into cinema like prior technologies, I suspect that the anxiety around it will simmer down.
Rather than fuel the hype cycle, we should remain patient and vigilant in working toward ethical implementations and protections, because AI can incur harms today that require protections for workers and viewers. While Hollywood unions have won protections through collective bargaining agreements, they will need to be continuously updated as the technology develops, as well as extended to non-unionized workers and workers in other media industries through state and federal policies. I would especially like to see policies that establish informed consent and compensation for artists whose materials are used as AI training data.
What should the public know and consider about AI in filmmaking?
BH: It’s ultimately up to those of us watching movies to decide what we like and don’t like about AI in cinema. We have the power of our attention and wallets to decide what films we want to support. At the end of the day, the Hollywood studio system will invest in what is profitable and divest from what is not. We should listen to the workers for guidance and watch films that align with our values. Despite the current anxiety around AI and the lure of its spectacle today, the public should remember what makes a film truly valuable: the human hearts and souls behind it.
Daniela K. Rosner, a UW professor of human centered design and engineering, is the co-author on the journal article. This research was funded by the Labor Research and Action Network and the National Science Foundation.
For more information, contact Halperin at bhalp@uw.edu.
ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
‘AI is Soulless’: Hollywood Film Workers Strike and Emerging Perceptions of Generative Cinema




When airport worker Andrey Chuba signed up for service in the Ukrainian military, it was partly to get away from another conflict. The year was 2020, when the war with Russian proxy forces was low-intensity and confined to the country’s eastern Donbas region. But at Boryspil International Airport, outside of Kyiv, conflict was brewing between management and workers. Chuba, a security guard, had been part of a wildcat organizing effort against unpopular changes to shift schedules, and was facing reprisals from his employer. Left hanging by local union leaders, who Chuba says were in the bosses’ pocket, he felt that a three-year army contract was a decent way out. Legislation guaranteed that, in addition to his military wage, he would continue receiving his civilian pay. But that was a lifetime ago.
When we met near Kyiv’s Independence Square this past December, the city was covered in gray slush, and the threat of Russian aerial attacks had become a part of daily life. Many Kyivites have developed an ear to distinguish the booms of Ukrainian air defense from enemy hits. When kept awake at night by the howling of Vladimir Putin’s Iranian-made drones, colloquially called “mopeds,” they know their colleagues will be just as sleepy the next day.
The airport where Chuba used to work has been mothballed, pending a peace that feels more remote with each month that passes. While his military contract has been extended until further notice, legislative amendments passed since the full-scale invasion have stripped him of the civilian part of his wage. “I’m not the only one,” he tells me. “Lots of people in service are in the same situation.”
Chuba is currently fighting the wage cut in court, arguing that legal amendments cannot be applied retroactively, like in his case. Although he admits the airport is currently strapped for cash, he doesn’t see it is a valid argument to deny him his pay. It recently emerged, he points out, that its CEO earned the equivalent of about $50,000 in the first half of 2023. Chuba’s story is one of many, illustrating a concerning trend.
While Ukrainian soldiers are defending their country at the front, Ukrainian workers have seen an attack from the rear, targeting their livelihoods, rights, and representatives. Since spring 2022, Ukraine’s parliament, which is dominated by president Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s Servant of the People party, has passed a series of amendments and reforms which have cut social benefits, deregulated labor relations, and restricted the power of trade unions.
Among other things, firing employees has been made easier, zero-hour contracts have been legalized, and private companies with fewer than 250 employees have been permitted to sign individual contracts with workers, rather than adhere to collective agreements or the country’s labor code. MP Halyna Tretyakova, head of the parliament’s social policy committee, has been spearheading Ukraine’s neoliberal reform course. According to her, the country’s labor law, originating in the 1970s, is an outmoded Soviet holdover.
Parliament has also decided to merge the country’s social insurance fund (managed jointly by the state, employers, and unions) with the state pension fund. Critics say the merger reduces union oversight, jeopardizes benefits like parental and sickness pay, and primarily benefits the insurance industry. Indeed, Tretyakova, herself a former insurance executive, has dismissed concerns over benefit reductions, suggesting the private sector can fill any gaps.

Russia’s invasion has undoubtedly plunged the Ukrainian economy into a deep crisis. Yet, reformers’ claims that their agenda is necessitated by the stresses of war seem dubious, given that similar proposals had already been launched in 2019, before Putin’s all-out war. At the time, unions put up stiff resistance, and the bill was withdrawn. With martial law in effect, however, protests and strikes are now banned. This time, unions only succeeded in lobbying for some of the latest reforms to be limited to wartime. But with the war dragging on, even these temporary laws risk becoming the new normal. Moreover, it appears that the governing party wants to go further yet and break the labor movement permanently.
The world of Ukrainian trade unions is complex and contradictory, and the answer to how grave the situation is depends on which representatives you ask. When Jacobin visited the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Ukraine (KVPU), one of the country’s two main union centers, its vice chairperson, Petro Tulei, and international secretary, Olesia Bryazgunova, struck a diplomatic tone. To them, the essential thing is the long-term perspective. “What’s important now, is to achieve peace and security, by defeating the Russian aggressor. After that, the democratic process will resume its normal course,” says Tulei. He emphasizes that, through behind-the-scenes dialog, unions did have some positive influence on the recent legal changes.
The KVPU emerged out of the great Donbas miners’ strikes during late-Soviet Perestroika, and is associated with the Ukrainian independence movement. Its chair, Mykhailo Volynets, is an MP for Yulia Tymoshenko’s oppositional Fatherland party, and has been one of the most vocal parliamentary critics of the recent reforms. The walls at KVPU headquarters are adorned with pictures of him shaking hands with Western leaders like Joe Biden.
According to KVPU deputy head Tulei, the neoliberal technocrats who legitimize their agenda by citing Ukraine’s ambitions of joining the European Union have a poor understanding of the European social model. He is proud that his organization actively participated in the 2014 revolution, which put Ukraine on its European path, and views EU integration as a promise of a more social Ukraine to come. “The European Commission has already reminded our lawmakers that Ukrainian labor law must be in line with EU standards,” he says.
Bryazgunova’s assessment is similarly colored by geopolitical considerations: “I get pissed off when our domestic shortcomings, like these reforms, are used abroad as arguments against financial and military aid to Ukraine,” the KVPU international secretary says bluntly. “This is a dangerous line of reasoning. Why should we have to die, just because we have some liberal madmen here?” Rather than criticize Ukraine, she asks fellow labor activists abroad to stand up for Ukrainian refugees and to lobby for socially just reconstruction programs for the war-ravaged country.
But not all Ukrainian labor activists are content to keep quiet until the war is over. “For bosses and top officials, the war has become a source of enrichment and a way to encroach on socioeconomic rights,” complains Oleksandr Skyba, a train driver with the state railway company. At the Kyiv freight depot, where he is based, he heads the local chapter of the Independent Railroad Workers’ Union, which is part of KVPU. According to him, Ukrainian companies do not suffer from their workers enjoying excessively good conditions. “On the contrary, a socially secure worker is a productive and patriotic worker,” he says. The policies being implemented, Skyba believes, instead risk undermining the population’s morale.
He rejects the reformers’ rhetoric about needing to cleanse the country’s social sector of its Soviet legacy. “Our legislation has been updated many times since then. And regardless — what about our tanks and artillery at the front, didn’t we inherit them from the Soviet era? And the buildings where our parliament and president work? If we’re just going to raze everything Soviet, let them sit in tents instead!”
According to him, the anti-worker sentiment now being promoted under the cover of war primarily benefits dishonest actors. He cites his own workplace as an example. Since the railways are considered critical infrastructure, a certain quota of its workers may be exempted from the military draft. But when management compiles the lists of who is to be deferred, sometimes they “forget” inconvenient employees — like Skyba himself. “I got a six-month exemption in August, but in September I was suddenly told I was no longer on the list. And there are similar stories from colleagues in Dnipro and Zaporizhzhia,” he says.
Skyba is not the only labor leader with reason for personal concern. “I wouldn’t be surprised if my office was bugged,” says Natalia Zemlianska. She heads the Ukrainian Union of Manufacturers, Small Business Owners, and Migrant Workers, which unites around five thousand members. Sitting behind her desk on the sixth floor of the House of Unions, her window faces onto Kyiv’s Independence Square, ground zero for Ukraine’s 2014 revolution. The imposing brutalist edifice belongs to the country’s largest labor union center, the Federation of Trade Unions of Ukraine (FPU), of which Zemlianska’s organization is a member.

The FPU is heir to the Soviet-era trade union federation. As confrontational labor organizing did not fit into the ruling Communist Party’s image of its workers’ paradise, the FPU’s predecessor was politically toothless. Its main task was providing sanatoriums and holiday resorts for members, rather than aiding them in workplace struggles, and critical labor activists say much of today’s FPU is still stuck in those habits. To this day, the FPU owns significant real estate, and it has been criticized for prioritizing its own commercial interests over representing workers. Whatever its deficiencies, the FPU is also home to many dedicated organizers, defending the interests of its members. And since the authorities have taken aim at the labor movement in general, and the FPU in particular, they are feeling increasingly threatened.
“We are under enormous pressure right now,” says Zemlianska. “FPU deputy head Volodymyr Sayenko was arrested in December 2022, and even though the investigation against him has been concluded, he is still being held.” Sayenko’s bail has been set at a whopping 124 million hryvnia, roughly $3 million. Several other FPU representatives, including Zemlianska, have had their homes raided by police. The investigation revolves around suspicions of embezzlement of FPU real estate.
Allegations of corruption and state attempts to seize FPU property have been a recurring theme stretching back through several previous governments. Given that the fight against corruption, an endemic issue in Ukraine, is broadly considered an apolitical, commonsense imperative, such allegations also serve to legitimize whatever political vendetta anyone might pursue. As part of the current investigation, stewardship of several FPU properties, including the House of Unions, was recently transferred to Ukraine’s Asset Recovery and Management Agency, ARMA.
Zemlianska won’t comment on the details of the case currently being made against Sayenko, but stresses that the authorities’ behavior contradicts the principles of rule of law and fails to honor international conventions protecting labor leaders from harassment. To her, the authorities’ anti-corruption rhetoric rings hollow.
One official who, in her view, personifies the authorities’ hypocrisy on the matter is Olena Duma, head of ARMA. Transparency International Ukraine has called her appointment a “significant danger” to the functioning of the agency, citing her political ties and lack of relevant experience. Since last summer, Duma also presides over an entity called the Trade Union Confederation of Ukraine. It is no accident that its title is confusingly similar to that of Ukraine’s two existing labor union centers, the KVPU and the FPU.
Zemlianska and several other labor leaders Jacobin has spoken to describe Duma’s organization as a pseudo-union, set up to undermine the country’s genuine labor movement. “ARMA already has the power to evict us from our offices at any time. This fiction of a union is but another instrument in this raiding. By transferring our real estate to it, the whole thing can be presented to the public as some kind of reshuffling within the union movement,” Zemlianska explains.
Internal documents recently obtained by OpenDemocracy suggest Duma’s astroturf union is part of a larger scheme, launched behind the scenes by MPs of the ruling party, including social policy chief Tretyakova, to set up an entire new union structure that would be friendly to the government and its reform program. To FPU representative Zemlianska, what’s tragic about this approach to dealing with labor is that it is reminiscent of the political culture Ukraine is struggling to leave behind.
“On the one hand we are forced to fight Russia’s aggression, to avoid living like in Russia, where unionists are put behind bars, but at the same time, we see the same tendencies here. Come on! Ten years ago, people gave their lives out there,” she exclaims, gesticulating to the square outside her window. “But now it feels like everything has been forgotten, and we’re starting over again! How is that possible?”
As Ukraine’s governing party seems set on combating the country’s labor movement, workers like airport guard Andrey Chuba are facing a murky future. Has he lost faith in his country? “We must believe in victory,” he says defiantly. “There is no damn alternative.”