How Thieves Stole Priceless Jewels at the Louvre in 8 Minutes

On Sun­day morn­ing, some auda­cious thieves stole price­less jew­els from the Lou­vre Muse­um. The heist took only eight min­utes from start to fin­ish.

At 9:30 a.m., the rob­bers parked a truck with a portable lad­der in front of the Parisian muse­um. They ascend­ed the lad­der, cut through a sec­ond-floor win­dow, entered the muse­um, smashed through dis­play cas­es, and snatched price­less jew­els, includ­ing a roy­al emer­ald neck­lace. By 9:38 a.m., they descend­ed the lad­der and escaped on motor­cy­cles. And, with that, they made off like ban­dits.

Above, the Wall Street Jour­nal video helps you visu­al­ize how the theft unfold­ed, as does this arti­cle in the New York Times.

In the Relat­eds below, you can learn about the great­est theft in Lou­vre history—that is, the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa, which helped turn da Vin­ci’s art­work into the most famous paint­ing in the world.

Relat­ed Con­tent

When Pablo Picas­so and Guil­laume Apol­li­naire Were Accused of Steal­ing the Mona Lisa (1911)

How the Mona Lisa Went From Being Bare­ly Known, to Sud­den­ly the Most Famous Paint­ing in the World (1911)

The Great­est Art Heist in His­to­ry: How the Mona Lisa Was Stolen from the Lou­vre (1911)

 

Yuval Noah Harari Explains How to Protect Your Mind in the Age of AI

You could say that we live in the age of arti­fi­cial intel­li­gence, although it feels truer about no aspect of our lives than it does of adver­tis­ing. “If you want to sell some­thing to peo­ple today, you call it AI,” says Yuval Noah Harari in the new Big Think video above, even if the prod­uct has only the vaguest tech­no­log­i­cal asso­ci­a­tion with that label. To deter­mine whether some­thing should actu­al­ly be called arti­fi­cial­ly intel­li­gent, ask whether it can “learn and change by itself and come up with deci­sions and ideas that we don’t antic­i­pate,” indeed can’t antic­i­pate. That AI-enabled waf­fle iron being pitched to you prob­a­bly does­n’t make the cut, but you may already be inter­act­ing with numer­ous sys­tems that do.

As the author of the glob­al best­seller Sapi­ens and oth­er books con­cerned with the long arc of human civ­i­liza­tion, Harari has giv­en a good deal of thought to how tech­nol­o­gy and soci­ety inter­act. “In the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry, the rise of mass media and mass infor­ma­tion tech­nol­o­gy, like the tele­graph and radio and tele­vi­sion” formed “the basis for large-scale demo­c­ra­t­ic sys­tems,” but also for “large-scale total­i­tar­i­an sys­tems.”

Unlike in the ancient world, gov­ern­ments could at least begin to “micro­man­age the social and eco­nom­ic and cul­tur­al lives of every indi­vid­ual in the coun­try.” Even the vast sur­veil­lance appa­ra­tus and bureau­cra­cy of the Sovi­et Union “could not sur­veil every­body all the time.” Alas, Harari antic­i­pates, things will be dif­fer­ent in the AI age.

Human-oper­at­ed organ­ic net­works are being dis­placed by AI-oper­at­ed inor­gan­ic ones, which “are always on, and there­fore they might force us to be always on, always being watched, always being mon­i­tored.” As they gain dom­i­nance, “the whole of life is becom­ing like one long job inter­view.” At the same time, even if you were already feel­ing inun­dat­ed by infor­ma­tion before, you’ve more than like­ly felt the waters rise around you due to the infi­nite pro­duc­tion capac­i­ties of AI. One indi­vid­ual-lev­el strat­e­gy Harari rec­om­mends to coun­ter­act the flood is going on an “infor­ma­tion diet,” restrict­ing the flow of that “food of the mind,” which only some­times has any­thing to do with the truth. If we binge on “all this junk infor­ma­tion, full of greed and hate and fear, we will have sick minds; per­haps a peri­od of absti­nence can restore a cer­tain degree of men­tal health. You might con­sid­er spend­ing the rest of the day tak­ing in as lit­tle new infor­ma­tion as pos­si­ble — just as soon as you fin­ish catch­ing up on Open Cul­ture, of course.

Relat­ed con­tent:

Sci-Fi Writer Arthur C. Clarke Pre­dict­ed the Rise of Arti­fi­cial Intel­li­gence & the Exis­ten­tial Ques­tions We Would Need to Answer (1978)

Will Machines Ever Tru­ly Think? Richard Feyn­man Con­tem­plates the Future of Arti­fi­cial Intel­li­gence (1985)

Isaac Asi­mov Describes How Arti­fi­cial Intel­li­gence Will Lib­er­ate Humans & Their Cre­ativ­i­ty: Watch His Last Major Inter­view (1992)

How Will AI Change the World?: A Cap­ti­vat­ing Ani­ma­tion Explores the Promise & Per­ils of Arti­fi­cial Intel­li­gence

Stephen Fry Explains Why Arti­fi­cial Intel­li­gence Has a “70% Risk of Killing Us All”

Yuval Noah Harari and Fareed Zakaria Break Down What’s Hap­pen­ing in the Mid­dle East

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

A New 20-Minute Supercut of David Letterman Slamming CBS: “You Can’t Spell CBS Without BS”

The can­cel­la­tion of The Late Show with Stephen Col­bert—CBS insists it was pure­ly a “finan­cial deci­sion,” the result of declin­ing ad rev­enue in late night tele­vi­sion. While some buy this argu­ment, oth­ers see it as a dif­fer­ent kind of “finan­cial deci­sion,” a deci­sion by Para­mount (the par­ent com­pa­ny of CBS) to sac­ri­fice Col­bert so that the Amer­i­can pres­i­dent won’t can­cel a lucra­tive $28-bil­lion merg­er. Yes­ter­day, David Let­ter­man, the pre­vi­ous host of CBS’ The Late Show, released a 20-minute super­cut fea­tur­ing the many times he took CBS to task over the years. The sub­text? He does­n’t seem to buy CBS’s talk­ing points. Nor does Jon Stew­art. More direct than Let­ter­man, Stew­art gives his own take on why CBS can­celed Col­bert: “I think the answer is in the fear and pre-com­pli­ance that is grip­ping all of Amer­i­ca’s insti­tu­tions at this very moment, insti­tu­tions that have cho­sen not to fight the venge­ful and vin­dic­tive actions of our pubic-hair-doo­dling com­man­der-in-chief. This is not the moment to give in. I’m not giv­ing in. I’m not going any­where.” Note to read­er: Jon Stew­art’s The Dai­ly Show airs on Com­e­dy Cen­tral, which is owned by Para­mount.

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. It’s a great way to see our new posts, all bun­dled in one email, each day.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Relat­ed Con­tent 

Stephen Col­bert Reads Flan­nery O’Connor’s Dark­ly Comedic Sto­ry, “The Endur­ing Chill”

Isaac Asi­mov Pre­dicts the Future on The David Let­ter­man Show (1980)

Hunter S. Thompson’s Many Strange, Unpre­dictable Appear­ances on The David Let­ter­man Show

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

Watch the Very First YouTube Video, a Defining Moment in Internet History

Giv­en the dom­i­nance YouTube has achieved over large swaths of world cul­ture, we’d all expect to remem­ber the first video we watched there. Yet many or most of us don’t: rather, we sim­ply real­ized, one day in the mid-to-late two-thou­sands, that we’d devel­oped a dai­ly YouTube habit. Like as not, your own intro­duc­tion to the plat­form came through a video too triv­ial to make much of an impres­sion, assum­ing you could get it to load at all. (We for­get, in this age of instan­ta­neous stream­ing, how slow YouTube could be at first.) But per­haps the triv­i­al­i­ty was the point, a prece­dent set by the first YouTube video ever uploaded, “Me at the Zoo.”

“Alright, so here we are in front of the, uh, ele­phants,” says YouTube co-founder Jawed Karim, stand­ing before those ani­mals’ enclo­sure at the San Diego Zoo. “The cool thing about these guys is that, is that they have real­ly, real­ly, real­ly long, um, trunks, and that’s, that’s cool. And that’s pret­ty much all there is to say.”

The run­time is 19 sec­onds. The upload date is April 24, 2005, two years before “Char­lie Bit My Fin­ger” and “Choco­late Rain,” four years before The Joe Rogan Expe­ri­ence, and sev­en years before “Gang­nam Style.” The pop-cul­tur­al force that is MrBeast, then a child known only as Jim­my Don­ald­son, would have been antic­i­pat­ing his sev­enth birth­day.

“After the zoo, the del­uge,” wrote Vir­ginia Hef­fer­nan in a 2009 New York Times piece on YouTube’s first four and a half years, when the site con­tained bare­ly any of the con­tent with which we asso­ciate it today. If you have a favorite YouTube chan­nel, it prob­a­bly did­n’t exist then. Hef­fer­nan approached the “fail,” “haul,” and “unbox­ing”  videos going viral at the time as new cul­tur­al forms, as indeed they were, but the con­ven­tions of the YouTube video as we now know them had yet to crys­tal­lize. Not every­one who saw the likes of “Me at the Zoo” would have under­stood the promise of YouTube. Per­haps it did­n’t feel par­tic­u­lar­ly rev­e­la­to­ry to be informed that ele­phants have trunks — but then, that’s still more infor­ma­tive than many of the count­less explain­er videos being uploaded as we speak.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

How to Watch Hun­dreds of Free Movies on YouTube

The Very First Web­cam Was Invent­ed to Keep an Eye on a Cof­fee Pot at Cam­bridge Uni­ver­si­ty

Is the Viral “Red Dress” Music Video a Soci­o­log­i­cal Exper­i­ment? Per­for­mance Art? Or Some­thing Else?

The Com­plete His­to­ry of the Music Video: From the 1890s to Today

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

They Study Authoritarianism. And They’re Leaving the U.S.: Why Three Yale Professors Have Moved to U. Toronto

Three Yale pro­fes­sors—Tim­o­thy Sny­der, Jason Stan­ley and Mar­ci Shore–have spent their careers study­ing fas­cism and author­i­tar­i­an­ism. They know the signs of emerg­ing author­i­tar­i­an­ism when they see it. Now, they’re see­ing those signs here in the Unit­ed States, and they’re not sit­ting by idly. They’ve moved to the Uni­ver­si­ty of Toron­to where they can speak freely, with­out fear­ing per­son­al or insti­tu­tion­al ret­ri­bu­tion. Above, they share their views in the NYTimes Op-Doc. It comes pref­aced with the text below:

Legal res­i­dents of the Unit­ed States sent to for­eign pris­ons with­out due process. Stu­dents detained after voic­ing their opin­ions. Fed­er­al judges threat­ened with impeach­ment for rul­ing against the administration’s pri­or­i­ties.

In this Opin­ion video, Mar­ci Shore, Tim­o­thy Sny­der and Jason Stan­ley, all pro­fes­sors at Yale and experts in author­i­tar­i­an­ism, explain why Amer­i­ca is espe­cial­ly vul­ner­a­ble to a demo­c­ra­t­ic back­slid­ing — and why they are leav­ing the Unit­ed States to take up posi­tions at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Toron­to.

Pro­fes­sor Stan­ley is leav­ing the Unit­ed States as an act of protest against the Trump administration’s attacks on civ­il lib­er­ties. “I want Amer­i­cans to real­ize that this is a demo­c­ra­t­ic emer­gency,” he said.

Pro­fes­sor Shore, who has spent two decades writ­ing about the his­to­ry of author­i­tar­i­an­ism in Cen­tral and East­ern Europe, is leav­ing because of what she sees as the sharp regres­sion of Amer­i­can democ­ra­cy. “We’re like peo­ple on the Titan­ic say­ing our ship can’t sink,” she said. “And what you know as a his­to­ri­an is that there is no such thing as a ship that can’t sink.”

She bor­rows from polit­i­cal and apo­lit­i­cal Slav­ic motifs and expres­sions, argu­ing that the Eng­lish lan­guage does not ful­ly cap­ture the demo­c­ra­t­ic regres­sion in this Amer­i­can moment.

Pro­fes­sor Snyder’s rea­sons are more com­pli­cat­ed. Pri­mar­i­ly, he’s leav­ing to sup­port his wife, Pro­fes­sor Shore, and their chil­dren, and to teach at a large pub­lic uni­ver­si­ty in Toron­to, a place he says can host con­ver­sa­tions about free­dom. At the same time, he shares the con­cerns expressed by his col­leagues and wor­ries that those kinds of con­ver­sa­tions will become ever hard­er to have in the Unit­ed States.

“I did not leave Yale because of Don­ald Trump or because of Colum­bia or because of threats to Yale — but that would be a rea­son­able thing to do, and that is a deci­sion that peo­ple will make,” he wrote in a Yale Dai­ly News arti­cle explain­ing his deci­sion to leave.

Their motives dif­fer but their analy­sis is the same: ignor­ing or down­play­ing attacks on the rule of law, the courts and uni­ver­si­ties spells trou­ble for our democ­ra­cy.

To delve deep­er into their work, see Stan­ley and Sny­der’s respec­tive works: How Fas­cism Works: The Pol­i­tics of Us and Them and On Tyran­ny: Twen­ty Lessons from the Twen­ti­eth Cen­tu­ry.

Relat­ed Con­tent 

Actor John Lith­gow Reads 20 Lessons on Tyran­ny, Penned by His­to­ri­an Tim­o­thy Sny­der

Yale Pro­fes­sor Jason Stan­ley Iden­ti­fies 10 Tac­tics of Fas­cism: The “Cult of the Leader,” Law & Order, Vic­tim­hood and More

Umber­to Eco’s List of the 14 Com­mon Fea­tures of Fas­cism

The Sto­ry of Fas­cism: Rick Steves’ Doc­u­men­tary Helps Us Learn from the Hard Lessons of the 20th Cen­tu­ry

Toni Mor­ri­son Lists the 10 Steps That Lead Coun­tries to Fas­cism (1995)

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 3 ) |

Carl Sagan Issues a Chilling Warning About the Decline of Scientific Thinking in America: Watch His Final Interview (1996)

Until the end of his life, Carl Sagan (1934–1996) con­tin­ued doing what he did all along — pop­u­lar­iz­ing sci­ence and “enthu­si­as­ti­cal­ly con­vey­ing the won­ders of the uni­verse to mil­lions of peo­ple on tele­vi­sion and in books.” When­ev­er Sagan appeared on The Tonight Show with John­ny Car­son dur­ing the 70s and 80s, his goal was to con­nect with every­day Amer­i­cans — peo­ple who did­n’t sub­scribe to Sci­en­tif­ic Amer­i­can â€” and increase the pub­lic’s under­stand­ing and appre­ci­a­tion of sci­ence.

At the end of his life, Sagan still cared deeply about where sci­ence stood in the pub­lic imag­i­na­tion. But while los­ing a bat­tle with myelodys­pla­sia, Sagan also sensed that sci­en­tif­ic think­ing was los­ing ground in Amer­i­ca, and even more omi­nous­ly with­in the cham­bers of the Newt Gin­grich-led Con­gress.

Dur­ing his final inter­view, aired on May 27, 1996, Sagan issued a strong warn­ing, telling Char­lie Rose:

We’ve arranged a soci­ety on sci­ence and tech­nol­o­gy in which nobody under­stands any­thing about sci­ence and tech­nol­o­gy, and this com­bustible mix­ture of igno­rance and pow­er soon­er or lat­er is going to blow up in our faces. I mean, who is run­ning the sci­ence and tech­nol­o­gy in a democ­ra­cy if the peo­ple don’t know any­thing about it.

And he also went on to add:

And the sec­ond rea­son that I’m wor­ried about this is that sci­ence is more than a body of knowl­edge. It’s a way of think­ing. A way of skep­ti­cal­ly inter­ro­gat­ing the uni­verse with a fine under­stand­ing of human fal­li­bil­i­ty. If we are not able to ask skep­ti­cal ques­tions, to inter­ro­gate those who tell us that some­thing is true, to be skep­ti­cal of those in author­i­ty, then we’re up for grabs for the next char­la­tan polit­i­cal or reli­gious who comes ambling along.

Near­ly 30 years lat­er, we have reached that point. Under the sec­ond Trump admin­is­tra­tion, DOGE has rushed to dis­man­tle the sci­en­tif­ic infra­struc­ture of our gov­ern­ment, hap­haz­ard­ly cut­ting the Nation­al Sci­ence Foun­da­tion, the Nation­al Insti­tutes of Health, and NASA. Next, they’re going after our lead­ing research uni­ver­si­ties, inten­tion­al­ly weak­en­ing the research engine that has fueled the growth of Amer­i­can corporations—and the over­all Amer­i­can economy—since World War II. And they’re replac­ing sci­en­tif­ic lead­ers with char­la­tans like RFK Jr. who dab­ble in the very pseu­do­science that Sagan warned us about. Need­less to say, our com­peti­tors aren’t mak­ing the same mis­takes. Few seri­ous gov­ern­ments are stu­pid enough to cut off their nose to spite their face.

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. It’s a great way to see our new posts, all bun­dled in one email, each day.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The Steps a Pres­i­dent Would Take to Destroy His Nation, Accord­ing to Elon Musk’s AI Chat­bot, Grok

Carl Sagan Presents His “Baloney Detec­tion Kit”: 8 Tools for Skep­ti­cal Think­ing

Richard Feyn­man Cre­ates a Sim­ple Method for Telling Sci­ence From Pseu­do­science (1966)

Daniel Den­nett Presents Sev­en Tools For Crit­i­cal Think­ing

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 4 ) |

Actor John Lithgow Reads 20 Lessons on Tyranny, Penned by Historian Timothy Snyder

In 2017, his­to­ri­an Tim­o­thy Sny­der wrote the con­cise book On Tyran­ny: Twen­ty Lessons from the Twen­ti­eth Cen­tu­ry, which went on to become a New York Times best­seller. A his­to­ri­an of fas­cism (then at Yale, now at U. Toron­to), Sny­der want­ed to offer Amer­i­cans a use­ful guide for resist­ing the coun­try’s drift towards author­i­tar­i­an­ism. It was handy then and even hand­i­er now–especially as the feds bear down on dif­fer­ent insti­tu­tions under­gird­ing Amer­i­can civ­il soci­ety. Law firms, uni­ver­si­ties, cor­po­ra­tions, media outlets–they’re all get­ting squeezed, and many have already vio­lat­ed the first of Sny­der’s 20 lessons: “Do not obey in advance.” Above, you can hear actor John Lith­gow read a con­densed ver­sion of Sny­der’s lessons. You can order a copy of his book online, or explore here a relat­ed video series that Sny­der pro­duced a few years back. Find a cheat sheet below.

1. Do not obey in advance
2. Defend insti­tu­tions
3. Beware the one-par­ty state
4. Take respon­si­bil­i­ty for the face of the world
5. Remem­ber pro­fes­sion­al ethics
6. Be wary of para­mil­i­taries
7. Be reflec­tive if you must be armed
8. Stand out
9. Be kind to our lan­guage
10. Believe in truth
11. Inves­ti­gate
12. Make eye con­tact and small talk
13. Prac­tice cor­po­re­al pol­i­tics
14. Estab­lish a pri­vate life
15. Con­tribute to good caus­es
16. Learn from peers in oth­er coun­tries
17. Lis­ten for dan­ger­ous words
18. Be calm when the unthink­able arrives
19. Be a patri­ot
20. Be as coura­geous as you can

Relat­ed Con­tent 

20 Lessons from the 20th Cen­tu­ry About How to Defend Democ­ra­cy from Author­i­tar­i­an­ism, Accord­ing to Yale His­to­ri­an Tim­o­thy Sny­der

His­to­ri­an Tim­o­thy Sny­der Presents 20 Lessons for Defend­ing Democ­ra­cy Against Tyran­ny in a New Video Series

Umber­to Eco’s List of the 14 Com­mon Fea­tures of Fas­cism

Yale Pro­fes­sor Jason Stan­ley Iden­ti­fies 10 Tac­tics of Fas­cism: The “Cult of the Leader,” Law & Order, Vic­tim­hood and More

Toni Mor­ri­son Lists the 10 Steps That Lead Coun­tries to Fas­cism (1995)

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 6 ) |

This Is What a Nuclear Strike Would Feel Like: A Precise Simulation

Though cer­tain gen­er­a­tions may have grown up trained to take cov­er under their class­room desks in the case of a nuclear show­down between the Unit­ed States and the Sovi­et Union, few of us today can believe that we’d stand much chance if we found our­selves any­where near a det­o­nat­ed mis­sile. Still, the prob­a­ble effects of a nuclear blast do bear repeat­ing, which the New York Times video above does not just con­vey ver­bal­ly but also visu­al­ly, deriv­ing its infor­ma­tion “from inter­views of mil­i­tary offi­cials and com­put­er sci­en­tists who say we’re speed­ing toward the next nuclear arms race.”

The last nuclear arms race may have been bad enough, but the rel­e­vant tech­nolo­gies have great­ly advanced since the Cold War — which, with the last major arms treaty between the U.S. and Rus­sia set to expire with­in a year, looks set to re-open. Don’t both­er wor­ry­ing about a whole arse­nal: just one mis­sile is enough to do much more dam­age than you’re prob­a­bly imag­in­ing. That’s the sce­nario envi­sioned in the video: “trav­el­ing at blis­ter­ing speeds,” the nuke det­o­nates over its tar­get city, and “every­one in range is briefly blind­ed. Then comes the roar of 9,000 tons of TNT,” pro­duc­ing a fire­ball “hot­ter than the sur­face of the sun.” And that’s just the begin­ning of the trou­ble.

A destruc­tive “blast wave” emanates from the site of the explo­sion, “and then… dark­ness.” The air is full of “dust and glass frag­ments,” mak­ing it dif­fi­cult, even dead­ly, to breathe. What’s worse, “no help is on the way: med­ical work­ers in the imme­di­ate area are dead or injured.” For sur­vivors, there begins the “radi­a­tion sick­ness, nau­sea, vom­it­ing, and diar­rhea”; some of the dead­liest effects don’t even man­i­fest for weeks. “The imme­di­ate toll of this one war­head: thou­sands dead, expo­nen­tial­ly more wound­ed. Dam­age to the ecosys­tem will linger for years.” Indeed, the extent of the dam­age is too great to pon­der with­out resort to gal­lows humor, as evi­denced by the video’s cur­rent top com­ment: “My boss would still force me to come into the office the next day.”

Relat­ed con­tent:

What Would Hap­pen If a Nuclear Bomb Hit a Major City Today: A Visu­al­iza­tion of the Destruc­tion

See Every Nuclear Explo­sion in His­to­ry: 2153 Blasts from 1945–2015

Pro­tect and Sur­vive: 1970s British Instruc­tion­al Films on How to Live Through a Nuclear Attack

53 Years of Nuclear Test­ing in 14 Min­utes: A Time Lapse Film by Japan­ese Artist Isao Hashimo­to

Every Nuclear Bomb Explo­sion in His­to­ry, Ani­mat­ed

When the Wind Blows: An Ani­mat­ed Tale of Nuclear Apoc­a­lypse With Music by Roger Waters & David Bowie (1986)

Based in Seoul, Col­in Marshall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the Sub­stack newslet­ter Books on Cities and the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les. Fol­low him on the social net­work for­mer­ly known as Twit­ter at @colinmarshall.

More in this category... »
Quantcast