A little bit ago, I warned of insecure architecture risks in BluEsky, which facilitate surveillance. On the other hand (as some have commented to me privately) there has been a ballooning number of “artists” visualizing what they can see with a federated protocol that offers “efficiency” for surveillance.

One of the core primitives of the AT Protocol that underlies Bluesky is the firehose. It is an authenticated stream of events used to efficiently sync user updates (posts, likes, follows, handle changes, etc).

Many applications people will want to build on top of atproto and Bluesky will start with the firehose, from feed generators to labelers, to bots and search engines.

In the atproto ecosystem, there are many different endpoints that serve firehose APIs. Each PDS serves a stream of all of the activity on the repos it is responsible for. From there, relays aggregate the streams of any PDS who requests it into a single unified stream.

This makes the job of downstream consumers much easier, as you can get all the data from a single location. The main relay for Bluesky is bsky.network, which we use in the examples below.

Their example code has given birth to a number of “artistic” endeavors. Here are but a few.

EmoJirain (I know, it’s supposed to say emoji, but who doesn’t see this as emo?)

RainBowsky (I know, it’s supposed to say rainbow, but the Russian in me sees bowsky):

InTothEbluEsky:

FirEhose3D:

NightSky:

Need I go on?

FinalWords prints all the text being deleted so there’s a record of things people want to make disappear, 3D Connections is a graph of everyone’s associations, Emotions is a live display of sentiment online…

Whee! Surveillance features can be repackaged as creative tools.

These “artistic” visualizations aren’t just pretty pictures, they offer live demonstrations of mass surveillance capabilities:

• EmoJirain and BluEskyEmo show real-time monitoring and classification of user emotional expression
• RainBowsky and InTothEbluEsky prove continuous scanning and pattern matching of all user content
• FirEhose3D and NightSky demonstrate real-time tracking of user activity and interaction patterns
• 3D Connections maps personal relationships and social networks across the entire platform
• FinalWords archives deleted content that users specifically wanted removed
• Emotions conducts mass-scale sentiment analysis of the entire user base

Each tool leverages the same centralized firehose of user data, just with a different veneer painted over surveillance capabilities.

While today we see emoji rain, tomorrow the same firehose could be used for… behavior pattern analysis and user profiling, network mapping of user relationships and communities, content monitoring for any topic of interest, real-time tracking of information spread, mass collection of user metadata (post times, devices, engagement patterns)… oh, hold on, that’s already happening.

The artistic expressions are processing the entire firehose of user activity, and who knows where they are physically, with a “friendlier” output than the operators of the infamous room 641a of San Francisco.

Thus the firehose feature fundamentally creates a broad attack surface by design and we are seeing it deployed. Bluesky, or is it BlueSky, …FireHose or FirEhose? Either way we’re literally talking about intentional access to all user activities. The architectural choice to create a centralized “firehose” of all user activity fundamentally undermines claims of decentralization.

Who ordered the complete visibility into centralized user behavior at scale?

Well, as they say in the docs, “relays aggregate the streams…into a single unified stream” because why?

rsc := &events.RepoStreamCallbacks{
  RepoCommit: func(evt *atproto.SyncSubscribeRepos_Commit) error {
    fmt.Println("Event from ", evt.Repo)
    for _, op := range evt.Ops {
      fmt.Printf(" - %s record %s\n", op.Action, op.Path)
    }
    return nil
  },
}

I’ll say it again.

Why?

The simplicity of the BluEsky example code isn’t just poor documentation about the risks, it clearly reflects an architecture decision to increase “efficiency” against privacy protection.

Look mom, just three lines of code is all it takes for you to tap into every user action across the platform!

While the example code shows how to technically connect to a centralized stream, it more importantly raises obvious critical security considerations that everyone should consider. I’m not exposing vulnerabilities in code — because that probably makes everything worse right now — but rather talking here about management decision to push “efficiency” into an architecture that begs surveillance and abuse.

1. Volume of data
2. Storage and processing of user activity data
3. Authentication and rate limits
4. Abuse of streams

The fact “art” is the motive, instead yet of targeted assassinations or mass deportations, doesn’t make BlueSky publishing code and docs for surveillance any less concerning.

This wouldn’t be the first time surveillance was dressed up in artistic clothing without explanation. In fact, the parallels to history are striking.

Recently I spoke with survivors of the East German Stasi infiltration of artistic communities (1970s-1980s). The state police saw cultural spaces such as galleries as opportunities for surveillance, especially related to cafes like Potsdam’s HEIDER.

The “avant-garde” artists actually worked as informants. This was arguably and extension of the Soviet Composers’ Union that monitored artistic expression.

Ok historians, let’s be honest here, this problem hits much closer to home than Americans like to admit. President Jackson and President Wilson were horrible abusers of surveillance, infamously using state apparatus to intercept and inspect all postal mail and all telephone calls. But we’re really talking about modern precedents like the GCHQ and NSA operation Optic Nerve 2008-2010 on Yahoo (years after I quit, please note) that sucked up a firehose of webcam images in a state-sponsored “art project”. And then the Google Arts & Culture face-matching app (2018) collected massive amounts of biometric data under the guise of matching people to classical paintings…

Wait a minute!

Optic Nerve (2008-2010) predated the ImageNet competition (2009-2017), based on unethical privacy violations by a Stanford team, that sparked the “big data” revolution we’re now swimming in.

Are we seeing history rhyme again with BlueSky’s “artistic” firehose? Surveillance keeps reinventing itself while using the same playbook.

Something smells rotten in BluEsky, and no amount of that EmoJirain is going to mask it for those who remember past abuses.

After liberating American troops firebombed the Nazis out of power in Berlin, Germany’s Bundestag reconstruction was very carefully curated in a serene color of profound philosophical heritage — one that traces the relationship between color and governance through centuries of Western thought. The lineage of blue was known for a political intention in rational deliberation, whereas bold reds marked a palette of mass death through extremist violence and hate groups.

“Reichstag blue is a well-chosen color. It can create a calm atmosphere in the Bundestag,” color expert Silvia Prehn told DW. “It is a calm color that conveys clarity and objectivity. Blue has a physically calming effect — one’s pulse and breath slow down as it relaxes and soothes.” […] The new foreign minister, Annalena Baerbock, would be more likely to be the heir to the “German Blue”: “Just yesterday she wore exactly the same color as the chairs in the Reichstag, that is, aquamarine with a bit of purple,” says the color expert. “She wants to be taken seriously.” Whether top German politicians in the new government take up the blue again or not, the chairs in the Bundestag will continue to be “Reichstag Blue.” “The blue stands for the thinkers, analysts, the people with the data, numbers and facts,” says Prehn. “Violet, on the other hand, represents the visionary and the foresighted.”

Though this relationship proves more complex across cultural contexts, the following analysis draws out patterns and meaning for national security discussion purposes rather than apologetically back away from useful predictors of threats.

The connection between blue and representative reasoned governance has roots in Western classical philosophy. Plato, in “The Republic,” speaks of a philosopher-king’s need for contemplation, where he associated vast blue depths (e.g. the sky, the ocean) with divine wisdom. While color theory wasn’t explicit in his writing, emphasis on forms of rational governance over fiery emotional appeals laid some groundwork for later analysis.

Immanuel Kant’s “Critique of Judgment” (1790) developed a crucial color theory relationship to governance. Whereas Kant held color secondary to form, he provided an analysis of “cool” versus “warm” experiences in aesthetics. This has influenced how later theorists understood color’s active role for intentionally shaping human behavior and defining the outcomes from our spaces.

The elevation of blue in Western governance cannot be separated from its religious significance. The use of “Marian Blue” in Christian iconography, particularly expensive lapis lazuli pigments, associated the color with divine wisdom and contemplation, as Michel Pastoureau documents in “Blue: The History of a Color” (2001). Richard H. Wilkinson in “Symbolism & Magic in Egyptian Art” (1994) informs us how rituals since ancient times have used red to represent danger and death, while blue was for birth and sustainable life. Islamic architectural traditions similarly made extensive use of blue tiles in places of worship and governance, as detailed in Robert Hillenbrand’s “Islamic Architecture: Form, Function and Meaning” (1994). The Great Blue Mosque in Istanbul shows blue applied to represent expressions of divine wisdom and earthly authority. Meanwhile, Buddhist and Hindu traditions have used red to suggest a shedding of the past in transition to revolutionary insights, as David Fontana suggests in “The Secret Language of Symbols” (1994).

Both religious symbolism and secular governance aesthetics, despite the vast differences in other regards, apparently arrived at a universal recognition of color meaning. The Soviet and Chinese communist movements, for example, dramatically made use of red’s symbolism and rejected blue. Both flags deliberately combined red with yellow/gold stars, a combination that Michel Pastoureau identifies in “Red: The History of a Color” (2017) as historically associated with imperial power. The British “red coats” had such an influence over American colonies that to this day the more “militant” minded adorn themselves with “salmon” shirts and “pink” pants to express soft-skin hard-head conservatism. Their palette signifies underlying politics of harsh exclusion and white-washing race-based privilege.

The Swiss flag’s red, originating in the 13th century Holy Roman Empire, presents an especially revealing case study in how militant symbolism evolved into a facade of “neutrality” that enabled profound moral failure. While Switzerland inverted its red cross on white background to create the Red Cross symbol in 1863, supposedly representing humanitarian neutrality, this same “neutrality” would later serve as cover for Swiss complicity with Nazi Germany. During WWII, Swiss banks laundered Nazi gold, refused Jewish refugees at their borders, and maintained profitable trade relationships with the Third Reich while claiming moral distance through their red-branded neutrality. This transformation of militant red into “neutral” red ultimately served the same authoritarian ends through passive facilitation of genocide for profit rather than active revolution.

The history of red in governance thus presents fascinating insights beyond mere revolution. The American flag incorporated red from Britain and France, marking a sharp contrast with its application of blue for justice and vigilance. The founders of America observed the color red in French political conflicts, which carried particularly profound revolutionary, symbolic, and political meanings.

During the 1789 French Revolution, red was prominently associated with abrupt course change through bloodshed. It was incorporated into the National Guard’s cockades for a unifying symbol of Parisian revolutionaries, later appropriated into the French tricolor, where it represented the fight to end prior rule. Napoleon Bonaparte thus cynically marked his seizure of power with red, pressing the color further into a French symbol of abrupt grab of authority. His uniforms and depictions often featured red elements to express dominance and imperial violence. Under his rule, France transitioned rapidly from popular revolution to unjust dictatorship, showing how red’s use to foment widespread rebellion has been rooted in tragic centralization and control. A historian remarked in 1825 how the British planned to hoist a red “no quarter” flag upon invasion by France, in order to warn only mass death lay ahead.

Later revolutions, such as those of 1830 and 1848, reaffirmed red as the emblem of rabid disruption and rejection of any compromise or concession in governance.

This is all important context for why Berlin’s “Reichstag Blue” represents a deliberate application of philosophical principles. When redesigning the Bundestag after reunification, architect Norman Foster collaborated with color psychologist Professor Max Lüscher, whose “The Lüscher Color Test” (1969) demonstrated blue’s calming, thought-promoting properties.

Michel Foucault’s “Discipline and Punish” (1975) suggests our institutional spaces and symbols measurably shape behavior, arguing that environmental designs — including color — promote either rational discourse or emotional manipulation.

Many other contemporary international organizations thus have largely embraced blue as a symbol of rationality and peace. The United Nations’ light blue represents peacekeeping missions, while the European Union’s blue flag with gold stars symbolizes unity and reason. NATO’s blue emblem similarly suggests stability and collective security rather than aggression.

The Republican Party’s adoption of red in 2000 during electoral coverage, however, marked a subtle but significant regression to authoritarian aspirations. What began as supposedly arbitrary choice revealed deeper intentions with the racist and anti-democratic MAGA movement’s gleeful promotion of bright red merchandise for overthrow of government. The color choice, whether broadly intentional or isolated, aligns with historical patterns of authoritarian movements. Color theorist Johannes Itten termed this use of red for maximum contrast in “The Art of Color” (1961) as an intentional technique to provoke emotional rather than rational responses — bold, high-contrast colors used to disrupt or blockade rational discourse by triggering emotions instead. Contemporary theorist Eva Heller notes in “Psicología del color” (2000) that while blue promotes “intellectual understanding and diplomatic communication,” red triggers “fight-or-flight responses” and emotional arousal useful for rapid power grabs.

Similarly the German party of Nazis today (“Alternative for Germany” or AfD) continues to use red very tactically in their propaganda filled hate campaigns.

The logo “Alternative for Germany” is visualized as a flashy red arrow resembling the commercial Nike logo. The color red acts as a signaling function and recalls the visual style of electoral propaganda campaigns by other far-right parties (Kress and Van Leeuwen 2006; Doerr 2017a).

The known contrast between careful contemplative blue versus the emotional reactionary red in political movements reveals a fundamental pattern in human governance.

Whether deployed as the bright red of revolution, the calculated red of imperialism, or the sanitized red of profitable “neutrality,” this particular color consistently served to either provoke or enable authoritarian impulses. As we witness the rise of populist movements worldwide, especially the return of nativist xenophobic groups such as MAGA, the conscious color choices in governmental spaces and symbols serve as crucial indicators.

The Bundestag’s blue chairs stand as the architectural commitment to reasoned debate, backed by centuries of philosophical and psychological understanding. The persistent use of red by authoritarian movements — from the Nazis to their Swiss enablers to modern extremists — demonstrates how color serves as both a tool and warning sign in the human evolution towards thoughtful rational governance away from rushed extreme emotional manipulation.

Red revolutionary violence (French, Soviet, Chinese)

• French Revolution (1789-1799)
  • Reign of Terror executions: ~17,000
  • Vendée massacre: ~170,000
  • Total French Revolution deaths: ~500,000-600,000
• Soviet Red Terror (1917-1953)
  • Great Purge executions (1934-1939): ~1.5 million
  • Induced famine (1932-1933): ~3.9 million
  • Gulag system deaths: ~1.6 million documented
  • Total Stalin-era deaths: 20-25 million estimated
• Chinese Communist Revolution (1949-1976)
  • Great Leap Forward deaths (1958-1962): 15-55 million
  • Cultural Revolution killings (1966-1976): 1.5-2 million
  • Total Mao-era deaths: 40-80 million estimated

Red imperial power (British Empire)

• Atlantic slave trade (1500s-1800s): ~3.5 million deaths during transport
• Indian famines under British rule (1769-1943):
  • Bengal Famine (1769-1773): ~10 million
  • Great Famine (1876-1878): ~5.5 million
  • Bengal Famine (1943): ~3 million
• Irish Potato Famine (1845-1852): ~1 million deaths
• Total estimated deaths under British Empire rule: 35-40 million

Red Nazism and false neutrality (German, Austrian, Swiss)

• Holocaust Jewish victims: ~6 million
• Total concentration camp deaths: ~11 million
• Swiss border rejections of Jewish refugees: ~24,500
• Total World War II deaths: 70-85 million

Red privilege and racist authoritarianism (New England Reds, Red Shirts, Red Summer… MAGA)

• Colonial slave trade participation (1670s-1800s)
  • Connecticut ports trafficked ~12,000 enslaved people directly
  • New England merchants deeply embedded in triangle trade
  • Yale, Brown, and other universities built with slavery profits
  • Maritime trade routes connected to Caribbean plantations
  • Prestigious New England families’ fortunes tied to slave trade
• Indigenous displacement (1630s-1770s)
  • 90% population decline of native peoples
  • Pequot War massacres and enslavement (1636-1638)
  • King Philip’s War devastation (1675-1678)
  • Systematic land seizures through “legal” mechanisms
  • Cultural destruction via forced assimilation
  • Disease and starvation from destroyed food systems
• Industrial militarization (1800s-present)
  • Major arms manufacturers established:
    • Colt (Hartford, CT)
    • Winchester (New Haven, CT)
    • Smith & Wesson (Springfield, MA)
  • Weapons supplied to:
    • Both sides of Civil War
    • American westward expansion
    • International conflicts
    • Domestic civilian market
  • Created massive wealth while enabling violence
  • Established political influence through arms manufacturing
  • Modern defense contractors continue this legacy

Related: MAGA narratives such as “Waving the Red” in large crowds to symbolize “going back” have a specific American history.

• The Red Shirt Movement in North Carolina 1898-1900, Prather, H.Leon, Journal of Negro History 62.2 (1977): 174-184.
• Riots in North Carolina: Red Shirts Drive Off Populist Speakers and Destroy Stand, New York Times, 2 August 1900.
• White Men Show Their Determination to Rid themselves of Negro Rule: A thousand Red Shirts, Morning Star, 2 November 1898.

It is a calculated mockery of horrible and deadly tragedy as MAGA-reds loudly signal where and when they want to “go back”…

Red Shirts were often worn by local chapters of what were socially known as “rifle clubs” but were in fact paramilitary groups across the South who worked to intimidate local freedmen and White sympathizers. Red Shirts often gathered at political rallies for candidates like Wade Hampton, or stood at polling places during elections, using intimidation and the threat of violence to prevent local Black residents from voting.

Surely you know this American national “rifle club” reference? Think about who was commandeered into running American guns into 1980s South Africa to prop up apartheid, and then setup domestic chapters to intimidate voters. Perhaps you’ve even seen their merchandise?

After thirty years of prowling the data centers of Silicon Valley and watching countless digital conflicts unfold across our bleeding world, I find myself returning, time and again, to that damned line from Virgil: “Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.” Blessed is the one who can know the causes of things.

Hah! If only it were that simple, eh?

You see, what most of us who studied at the London School of Economics miss — as we scurry around with this motto emblazoned on our umbrellas, shirts or scarves — is an exquisite irony of it all. Virgil penned this phrase in his “Georgics” around 29 BC, when the dust of civil war barely had settled on Roman soil. The suffering was still raw, so to speak.

Let’s dissect Book II, lines 490-492 properly:

Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas
Atque metus omnes, et inexorabile fatum
Subjecit pedibus, strepitumque Acherontis avari

Happy is the one able to understand the causes of things, and who casts beneath their feet all fear, inexorable fate, and the roaring depths of river Acheron

The full passage speaks not just of understanding, but of overcoming fear, of putting one foot in front of the other despite an inexorable fate. Having spent decades studying the poetry of civil wars — from Spain to Syria, from the American South to the killing fields of Cambodia — I can tell you this: such knowledge rarely brings forth Virgil’s promised serenity.

Dryden’s attempt in 1697 at a translation — “Happy the Man, who, studying Nature’s Laws, / Thro’ known Effects can trace the secret Cause” — tones it down somewhat, doesn’t it? Makes it all sound rather scientific, almost cheerful. But there’s a cruelty still there, lurking beneath the surface.

When I think of our school’s motto, I can’t help but remember the poets I’ve studied — men and women who wrote amidst their own civil conflicts. They knew the causes all too well, didn’t they? And yet did that knowledge bring anyone any peace? Consider that Virgil himself was writing in the aftermath of Rome’s own devastating civil wars. He knew, perhaps better than most, that understanding the causes of things doesn’t necessarily make us “felix” — fortunate or happy.

The later adaptation — “Felix, qui potest rerum cognoscere causas” — shifts our view to the present tense, making it more immediate, more urgent. But I prefer the original’s past tense. It carries the weight of history, the burden of hindsight that I studied at LSE. It reminds us that true knowledge comes late, always too late.

And what of that final line about the “roaring depths of river Acheron“? The river of those who suffer the most, lost souls hungry to corrupt or disappear ever more to be like them. How many civil war poets have stood at its metaphorical banks, documenting the endless appetite of conflict?

Some of my fellow graduates of LSE might disagree, but I’ve always found it somewhat amusing that we have this as our motto. In my more cynical moments (of which there are many, I assure you), I wonder if it was chosen precisely because of an inherent contradiction to navigate — an impossible promise that gaining understanding will bring the world happiness.

After all these years of study and work in the guts of Big Tech, of parsing through verses written in blood and desperation, I’ve come to believe that Virgil wasn’t making a statement of fact, but rather expressing a desperate hope. A hope that somewhere, somehow, someone might truly understand and find peace in that understanding.

But then again, what do I know? I’m just an old cybersecurity executive who’s spent too many years reading poetry written by those who saw their worlds tear themselves apart.

Big news news from my alma mater. Sources say the award ceremony was delayed by three hours of LSE professors arguing about the best algorithm to determine the most efficient way to accept the trophy:

The Times and The Sunday Times Good University Guide has ranked LSE as the top university in the UK and named the School as its ‘University of the Year 2025’. This is the first time the Good University Guide has awarded LSE the prestigious ‘University of the Year’ title, and the first time we have been ranked number one in the country. […] This fantastic result follows other high rankings in university league tables over the last year. In September 2024, The Guardian placed LSE as the top university in London, and as the best place to study Accounting and Finance. Likewise, the Complete University Guide 2025 named the School as the number one university in the capital.

LSE students are reportedly “cautiously optimistic” about the news, as they’re still trying to calculate the long-term societal and economic impact of celebrating rankings. LSE’s Director, beaming with indignation, announced, “This recognition validates our long-standing belief that if you can’t measure it, it doesn’t matter. And if you can measure it… why? We look forward to quantifying this award in terms of social good. We’re thrilled, of course, but we need to consider the opportunity cost of joy.”

In a final stroke of genius, the LSE administration has decided to commemorate this achievement by commissioning a statue of a giant invisible hand.

Meanwhile, well-appointed representatives from Oxford and Cambridge were spotted in a corner, drowning their sorrows in spiked lukewarm tea. Overheard mutterings included phrases like “patronage failure” and “maybe unresolved bad legacy is bad,” suggesting a dawning realization that rowing prowess and ancient stone blocks carved to resemble elephantine profits from colonialism might not be the best metrics for educational excellence in the 21st century. An anonymous don was heard lamenting, “Perhaps we should have focused more on direct and honest economic models and less on which tie to wear for dinner.”