Around the year 64, the Roman emperor Nero commissioned a huge statue depicting himself as a god. The bronze statue, designed and constructed by the Greek architect Zenodorus, was approximately 115 feet high, comparable to our Statue of Liberty. It was so heavy, it took a team of 24 elephants to move it. The statue was not covered with gold.
Known as the Colossus of Nero (Colossus Neronis), the statue was parked outside the Flavian Amphitheater (Amphitheatrum Flavium), which was eventually renamed the Colosseum. We know what this monument looked like because it was represented on coins and medallions.
At the time, it was controversial (and somewhat offensive) for a still-living emperor to be portrayed as a god, something that had been done previously by Caligula. After Nero's suicide, the statue was modified to represent the sun god Sol. Emperor Commodus had the head replaced, along with other modifications, to depict himself as Hercules, but after his death, it was restored as Sol.
The Colossus of Nero was destroyed, possibly during the Sack of Rome or in the fifth-century earthquakes. The remaining bronze was salvaged and melted down, and may have been used to make cannons. Today, the only remaining traces of this monument to narcissism are some of its concrete foundation stones on display near the Colosseum.
Whose Fault is it Anyway?
Before "no fault divorce," people who wanted to dissolve their marriages faced serious obstacles.
Typically, one partner had to go to court and prove that the other partner was at fault. Reasons could include adultery, desertion, extreme cruelty, and habitual drunkenness. The judge would hear the evidence and then decide whether the claim was sufficient to justify granting the divorce. Divorce cases were reported in the newspapers, sometimes in great detail.
There was supposed to be one victim and one villain, so if both parties were deemed to be at fault, the judge might refuse the divorce. Or the judge might decide the situation just wasn't bad enough to warrant a divorce.
Here is a newspaper report of a case from 1845, in which the judge decided the evidence wasn't good enough.
As recently as 1969, a judge ruled that, since both spouses were cruel to each other, they could not be divorced.
In this case from 1848, the court ruled that a spouse's confession to adultery wasn't enough. Because of rulings like this, people who could afford a private detective would sometimes have their unfaithful spouse followed and photographed so they could be caught in the act, in front of witnesses.
In some cases, a couple would privately agree to manufacture a case, just so they could get free of each other. For example, they could arrange for a private detective to "catch" the husband in a hotel room with another woman. Or, a spouse accused of bad behavior might enlist friends to testify against him. Judges took a dim view of these cases. Here is one from 1900.
To 21st-century minds, this 1900 case probably seems like a marriage that should be ended, but the judge did not agree.
Some states had more lenient laws than others. Spouses who could afford it would sometimes go to Nevada and stay for six months (the required residency) and then file for divorce. Those in a hurry might take a trip to Mexico, where divorces were nearly always granted upon request.
Mexico fought back.
In the meantime, courts began declaring Mexican divorces invalid in the U.S.
As noted above, most of the people traveling for divorce were women, as were most divorce-seekers within the U.S. They often found themselves blocked by laws that limited the autonomy of married women. Ironically, lack of control over their own lives may have been a contributing factor to wives' desire to escape their husbands. Then they were blocked by a male-dominated legal system, petitions denied by judges who didn't think their circumstances were bad enough to let them go. In one frustrasting case, a woman who wanted to divorce her husband because of his drunkenness, was denied because he drank only on the weekends. In another, "incompatibility" wasn't sufficient to free a woman whose husband was a Peeping Tom.
Critics argued that no-fault would lead to a massive surge in the divorce rate. After legalization, there was a temporary increase in divorces, as the backlog of people who had been eager to divorce worked their way through the system. But then the divorce rate gradually dropped. Additionally, studies have shown that the female suicide rate dropped significantly after the introduction of no-fault divorce.
In recent years, some bloggers and politicians have campaigned for an end to no-fault divorce. Many of these people openly admit their intent is to restrict women's choices.
- The Evolution of Uncontested Divorces
- No-Fault Divorce Under State Laws
- Does No-Fault Divorce Harm or Help Women?
- No-Fault Divorce Saves Women's Lives
- Why No-Fault Divorce is Necessary
- Attacks on No-Fault Divorce
"You Will Ride a Bicycle, and You Will Like It."
There are a lot of people who quite adamantly believe that every city's air quality, transportation and parking problems could be solved if we would just ban cars and make everyone ride bicycles everywhere. This would make our streets "pedestrian friendly." What they often fail to consider:
- Will employers provide showers and changing rooms for workers who arrive sweaty and dirty?
- Bicycles also need to be parked, somewhere. Many cyclists obstruct public space by chaining their bikes to inappropriate objects. Can they be stopped?
- How will this work for grocery shopping and other errands that require transporting packages or large items?
- What alternatives will there be during times of heavy rain, dangerously hot weather, and snow?
- Around 20% of people have a physical disability, often one that makes riding a bicycle impossible.
- Many elderly people are unable to ride bicycles.
- How will we resolve conflicts between cyclists and pedestrians?
- Will bicycle culture change the way we dress for various occasions? What will happen to formalwear, including wedding gowns?
- Will bike culture be receptive to small electric vehicles (perhaps something like golf carts) for situations where a bike is not a good fit?
- Will we still be allowed traditional cars for cross-country trips?
Why You Shouldn't Use AI to Write Your Blog Posts
I asked Claude, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot to write a blog post on "why it's a bad idea to have AI write a blog post. Here's what I got.
Why You Shouldn't Use AI to Write Your Blog Posts
There's a certain irony in asking an AI to make the case against AI-written content. But maybe that's exactly why it works — who better to explain the limitations of a ghost than the ghost itself?
Here's why hitting "generate" on your next blog post is a mistake, even when the result looks polished.
## It Sounds Like Everyone Else
AI language models are, at their core, pattern-matching machines trained on the aggregate of human writing. The result is prose that sits squarely in the middle of everything — competent, inoffensive, and utterly forgettable. Every sentence lands where you expect it to. Every transition is smooth. Nothing surprises you.
Good writing has texture. It has weird detours, strong opinions, and moments where the author's personality bleeds through. AI writing is the literary equivalent of a stock photo: technically fine, but somehow nobody's home.
## Your Readers Can Tell
People are more attuned to AI-generated text than we often assume. There's a particular rhythm to it — a tendency toward tidy three-part structures, over-reliance on phrases like "it's worth noting" and "in today's landscape," and a habit of hedging every claim into meaninglessness. Readers who encounter it regularly develop an instinct for the uncanny valley of the written word.
When someone senses they're reading AI output, the trust evaporates. They're no longer reading *you* — they're reading a statistical average of the internet. That's not a relationship you can build an audience on.
## It Skips the Part That Actually Matters
Here's something most people don't say out loud: the value of writing a blog post is often *in the writing of it*. The research you do, the position you're forced to take, the argument you have to stress-test in your own head before it reaches the page — that's where the thinking happens.
When you outsource that process, you don't just outsource the words. You outsource the thinking. You end up publishing a post you don't fully believe, on a topic you haven't fully worked through, and it shows — even when every sentence is grammatically impeccable.
## It Has No Actual Experience
AI can synthesize information about grief, or burnout, or the experience of launching a startup, but it has never felt any of those things. The most resonant blog posts are the ones where the writer has *skin in the game* — a hard-won insight, a failure they're still processing, a contrarian view they're willing to defend.
AI produces confident-sounding text about experience it doesn't have. That's not a flaw in the model; it's just what the model is. But it means that any post requiring genuine perspective — which is most posts worth reading — will always ring slightly hollow when machine-generated.
## It Feeds the Content Landfill
The internet already has more content than anyone can read. What it's genuinely short on is *good* content — writing that changes how you think about something, or makes you feel less alone, or teaches you something you couldn't have just Googled.
AI makes it trivially easy to produce more content. It does nothing to raise the floor on quality. Every AI-generated post that gets published makes it a little harder for readers to find the stuff that actually matters — including yours, if you're writing it yourself.
## So What's AI Actually Good For?
To be fair: AI is genuinely useful for *parts* of the writing process. Brainstorming angles, drafting an outline, punching up a weak sentence, catching typos — all fair game. Using it as a thinking partner is different from using it as a ghostwriter.
The mistake isn't using AI at all. It's using it to skip the hard part. The hard part — figuring out what you actually think, and finding the words that are true to it — is the only part readers care about.
---
*So yes: an AI wrote this post. Make of that what you will.*
Random Observations
Every business, every website, every product - they all want me to download their app. Each of these apps does only one thing: serve the interests of that one product or site. I have enough apps on my phone. I can't manage thousands of them, and even if I could, I don't want to.
We now have government officials urging us to dress up for airplane travel.
Actually, People used to dress nicely to fly, back when meals were included, and you could choose your meal, even in coach, and there was room for human legs.
For-profit prisons are an incentive to create more crimes. We now see a government that wants to criminalize poverty, defines protest as terrorism, and that treats misdemeanors like felonies. All to pour more money into the prison industry.
The Republican administration's message to immigrants: When we said "Do it the right way," we were just kidding.
In addition to canceling visas without warning and arresting immigrants who faithfully show up at required interviews and hearings, the regime's agents have grabbed people who were just about to take the oath and become naturalized citizens. They have arrested tourists and denied entry to people with valid visas. Now the "Justice Department" plans to target hundreds of naturalized citizens with the goal of revoking their citizenship.
Priorities
AI-generated image
The powerful people who are privileged with deciding our fates exhibit a strange mentality. Some, apparently, really believe in certain "end times" prophecies and hope to hasten the end of the world for religious reasons. Others truly don't care about life on earth, and just don't mind destroying everything. But all of them want to get rich along the way, as if the memory of their bank accounts will be meaningful in a dead world.
There's a weird war killing Americans, the Strait of Hormuz is closed to shipping, the company responsible for our worst oil spill has been given permission to do it again, violent thugs employed by the government attack our cities, the "president's" family profits in the billions, reporters who publish the truth are threatened with death, diseases spread, citizens can no longer afford to live, but what really matters is the decor in the Royal Palace.
Random Thoughts
Imagine what it would be like if wars could operate only on Tuesday and Thursday from noon to 4:00, while billions of dollars were poured into the children's library.
We need to outlaw the medicine bottle caps that require "push down and turn".
The same people who want to legislate personhood for fetuses and zygotes, routinely deny the personhood of adult women.
Imagine a country that readily spends a billion dollars a day to provide physical therapy and mobility aids for the disabled, and tells the war to fill out some forms and wait.
SAVE What?
The Issue
The SAVE Act, formally known as the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, is a proposed U.S. bill that would require individuals to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship—such as a passport, birth certificate, or enhanced ID—to register to vote in federal elections. It passed the House on February 11, 2026, by a vote of 218–213 along party lines, with one Democrat joining all Republicans in support. The bill now moves to the Senate, where it faces significant hurdles due to the 60-vote threshold needed to overcome a filibuster and opposition from some Republican senators concerned about federal overreach.
The bill mandates that states cannot register voters unless they present approved documents verifying citizenship. Standard driver’s licenses, tribal IDs, and military IDs alone would not suffice unless they explicitly indicate citizenship status, which most do not.
The 2026 version, also called the SAVE America Act, includes a photo ID requirement to vote in person and stricter rules for mail-in voting, such as submitting a copy of an eligible ID. It also requires states to purge non-citizens from voter rolls and share unredacted voter data with the Department of Homeland Security.
Critics argue the bill would disenfranchise eligible voters, many of whom may lack immediate access to required documents. Studies estimate 21.3 million citizens do not have easy access to proof of citizenship. Opponents also note that noncitizen voting is already illegal and extremely rare.
Getting the Documents
Vital records (birth, marriage, death) are usually stored by the county where the event took place. They may have a Vital Records department, or some records (such as recent births and deaths) may be stored by the Health Department.
If you need a copy of your birth certificate, you can probably go in person to the county offices. If you have moved away, you can probably do this online or by mail. (This cannot be done by making a phone call.) Your county may offer forms on its website, or it may direct you to a third-party (for-profit) provider. In any case, getting a copy of your certificate is not a free service. Fees vary, but in most cases will not be more than $35.00. If you use the third-party service, their fee will be $10.00 - $15.00. There may be additional charges for shipping.
You need to know the difference between an "informational copy" and a "certified copy". The informational copy comes stamped with the words "Not for identification". The certified copy is provided only to authorized people, such as the person in question and certain close family members. As an authorized person, you will have to provide a notarized declaration swearing that you are who you are. Notary fees vary, depending on where you go, but probably will be around $20.00.
Depending on how busy your county is these days, it can take several weeks (maybe a few months) to receive the certificate. By the way, if you want more than one, you'll have to pay an additional fee for each copy. (They come on nice paper with a raised logo.) If your county's records were destroyed in a hurricane, fire, or flood, you will not be able to get a copy.
Some people don't have a birth certificate because they were born at home or in a remote location, and the birth was not officially registered. It may be possible to get a "Delayed Birth Certificate," but the requirements can be insurmountable. My grandfather, born on the family farm, never had a birth certificate, although he tried many times to get one. The bureaucrats were not cooperative.
If your current name doesn't match your birth name, you'll need to document that. If you changed your name upon marriage, you'll need a copy of your marriage certificate. The procedure and fees are usually the same as for a birth certificate.
If you've been married more than once, you may need copies of all marriage certificates as well as copies of divorce decrees. Divorce documents may be difficult or impossible to obtain, as many counties keep them for only a limited time. If you were widowed before you remarried, you might want a copy of your first spouse's death certificate. The procedure and fee for that is similar to getting a birth certificate.
If your name was changed due to adoption, you'll need copies of the relevant documents. To get copies of your adoption records, usually you must file a petition in the superior court where the adoption took place. You will need to include proof of identity (a driver's license or passport) and you may need a copy of your original birth certificate (see above). The procedure for getting adoption records varies from state to state, as do the fees.
If you had your name legally changed for personal reasons, you'll need an official copy of that document. The procedure to get it is unclear, as this kind of document is not listed on most counties' websites.
Sometimes people are surprised find that the name they use differs from the birth certificate. I knew someone who thought he was Joseph, who got a copy of his birth certificate and learned that he was born Giuseppe. Sometimes it's just a spelling variation, like Janice vs. Janis or Susan vs. Suzanne. Still, the name in use is not an exact match to the birth certificate. I don't know what procedure there may be to reconcile discrepancies like these.
Some people seem to think that this is not a real problem. They happen to have certified copies of all their records, that they have carefully preserved and dragged with them whenever they moved. They imagine that everyone else does what they do, and are contemptuous of anyone whose life isn't exactly like theirs. However, the reality is that most of us simply don't possess certified copies of every document that has passed through our lives. And even those who do may run into discrepancies or unexpected information gaps.
The proposed requirement to make voter registration contingent upon having a current qualifying paper with a name exactly matching one's birth certificate places a procedural and financial burden on some people that is not placed on others. Married women are most likely to be affected and disenfranchised.
The League of Women Voters has stated, "Millions of eligible voters could be blocked from casting a ballot under the SAVE America Act’s restrictive documentary proof of citizenship requirements. This includes voters who are already properly registered and previously provided proof of citizenship but could still be turned away at the polls if they do not bring a passport or other qualifying document with them on Election Day."
The ACLU has stated, "The SAVE Act echoes failed and unconstitutional laws like Kansas’s proof of citizenship requirement, which purged over 30,000 eligible voters and was struck down in federal court. This legislation would especially harm naturalized citizens, voters with low incomes, voters of color, Native American voters, rural voters, and first-time voters—many of whom lack easy access to a passport or birth certificate. It would also threaten the voting rights of as many as 69 million women who have taken their spouse’s name but whose birth certificate does not match. By demanding burdensome documentation and triggering erroneous voter roll purges, the SAVE Act also threatens the ability of even long-time registered voters to stay on the rolls and participate in elections."
Click HERE for an explainer from Rock the Vote.
"Comply or Die"
11 seconds before the shooting, Mr. Pretti is restrained by multiple agents. Still from video by Philophon via Reddit.The New York Times.
Greg Bovino, head of ICE, says the agents who killed a man on a public street in front of witnesses are the "real victims" and the dead man is to blame for his own murder as a peaceful citizen behaving legally. If Bovino had been around in the seventies, he'd probably have announced that poor Ted Bundy was just a hapless victim of all those nasty girls.
Even though the agents' faces were covered to conceal them from witnesses and cameras, a genuine, standard investigation into the murder would be able to determine the identity of the shooter(s). They would preserve the scene, collect evidence following strict procedures, identify whose gun fired the fatal bullets, who had GSR on their clothes, etc. But the perpetrator is unlikely to be named, because they didn't start a proper investigation at the crime scene, the evidence will have been mishandled, and all the agents will lie despite being caught on video from multiple angles; besides, DHS wants more of this.
They want you to be paralyzed with fear. They want a populace too terrified to complain. They want the perfect police state.
- Minneapolis Residents Resolve to Fight On
- CNN Video Analysis
- Judge Grants Restraining Order Against DHS
- Anti-ICE Protests Intensify
- How Many People Have Been Shot By ICE?
- Remembering Renee Good
Recent Random Thoughts
"Do You Hear the People Sing?" Les Miserables
If you're aiming your cell phone at the same time you're aiming your gun, you're making a snuff film.
Just as we don't answer the phone for an unrecognized number - don't open your door to an uninvited knock.
It doesn't really matter that the victim was a nice guy, a nurse, a kind person, helpful, friendly. If it turned out that he was a heartless curmudgeon who kicked dogs, cursed at small children, and stole his neighbors' Amazon boxes, he still wouldn't deserve to be beaten by thugs and shot to death on the street for the "crime" of recording their behavior on his phone. These lynch mobs have been turned loose in our streets by an authoritarian regime hell-bent on intimidating and demoralizing us with their "comply or die" mentality. They give these murderous goons military weapons and send them out to act as judge and executioner. And they've been given a budget that is bigger than that of most armies in the world. The amount of money being spent to perpetrate vandalism, theft, assault, kidnapping, and murder tells you how much it is worth to the oligarchs and their henchmen to keep us in line. Let's make sure we don't stay in line.
Real law enforcement officers often detain armed suspects without killing them.
Gemini's Unauthorized Intrusion Into Your Email
If you use Gmail, you may have noticed that AI summaries of your email exchanges have started to appear in your email feed, even though you did not request this feature.
Many people want to turn this off, and online forums are full of people asking how. I went straight to Gemini with my query. Following is the "conversation" I had with the bot.
Note that I have used red to add emphasis to some parts of this text.
ME:
How can I make Gemini stop reading my email, and stop providing those summaries?
GEMINI:
To stop Gemini from summarizing your emails and reading your inbox, you have to navigate a few layers of Google's settings. Because Gemini is deeply integrated into "Smart Features," turning it off often requires disabling those broader tools.
### 1. Disable "Smart Features" (Desktop)
This is the most direct way to remove the "Summarize this email" button and the Gemini side panel.
1. Open [Gmail](https://mail.google.com) on your computer.
2. Click the **Settings (gear icon)** in the top right → **See all settings**.
3. Under the **General** tab, scroll down to **Smart features and personalization**.
4. **Uncheck** the box.
5. Scroll further down to **Smart features and personalization in other Google products** and **uncheck** that as well.
6. Scroll to the bottom and click **Save Changes**. Gmail will reload.>
**Note:** Turning this off will also disable non-AI features like automatic email categorization (Promotions/Social tabs), summary cards for flights/packages, and Smart Compose.
---
### 2. Disable the Gemini Extension (Account Level)
If you want to ensure the Gemini AI (the standalone chatbot) can't "reach into" your Gmail to answer questions:
1. Go to [gemini.google.com](https://gemini.google.com).
2. Click **Settings** (gear icon) at the bottom left.
3. Select **Extensions**.
4. Find the **Google Workspace** extension and toggle it **Off**.
* This prevents the Gemini chatbot from searching your Drive, Docs, and Gmail when you talk to it.
--- ### 3. Disable in the Gmail Mobile App
The mobile settings are separate from the desktop settings.
1. Open the Gmail app on your phone.
2. Tap the **Menu (three lines)** → **Settings**.
3. Select your specific **email account**.
4. Scroll to the **General** section.
5. Uncheck **Smart features and personalization**.
---
### 4. For Google Workspace (Work/School) Users
If you are using a company account and still see Gemini after doing the above, your IT administrator may have "forced" the feature.
* **If you are the Admin:** Go to the [Google Admin Console](https://admin.google.com) →
**Apps** → **Google Workspace** → **Gemini**. From there, you can turn off Gemini for specific organizational units.
* **If you are an Employee:** You may only be able to hide the side panel, but you cannot fully remove the integration unless your admin disables it for the whole company.
Would you like me to show you how to also clear your existing Gemini activity history so Google doesn't keep a record of past summaries?
ME:
It verges on criminal that turning off this intrusive violation of my privacy will also turn off other features. Whoever designed this should be fired.
GEMINI:
It is completely understandable why that feels like a "digital hostage" situation. Having to sacrifice basic tools like spell-check and organized inbox tabs just to regain your privacy is a classic example of **forced bundling**.
Since Google currently links Gemini to the "Smart Features" toggle, here is the most effective way to handle this without completely breaking your workflow:
### 1. The "Ad-Blocker" Solution (Highly Recommended)
If you use Gmail in a desktop browser (Chrome, Firefox, Edge), you can "delete" the Gemini UI elements while keeping your Smart Features (like tabs and spell-check) active.
* **Install a blocker:** Use a free, open-source extension like **uBlock Origin**.
* **Target the "Sparkle":** 1. Right-click on the Gemini icon (or the summary box).
2. Select **"Block element..."**
3. A small window will pop up in the corner; click **Create**.
* **The Result:** The summary box and Gemini buttons disappear from your screen, but your "Social" and "Promotions" tabs stay exactly where they are.
---
### 2. Move to a Third-Party App
You can bypass the Gemini interface entirely by using a different email client. This allows you to keep your `@gmail.com` address but use an interface that doesn't include Google's AI overlays.
* **Desktop:** Use **Thunderbird** or **Apple Mail**. These apps will handle your spell-check and local organization without triggering Gemini's summarization.
* **Mobile:** Use an app like **Spark** or **Outlook mobile**. They connect to your Gmail servers but use their own interface, usually ignoring the Gemini summary injection.
---
### 3. Disable "Gemini Apps Activity"
While the instructions I gave you earlier stop the *display* of Gemini, Google still has a background setting for what it does with your data. To ensure your interactions aren't being logged:
1. Go to [myactivity.google.com](https://myactivity.google.com).
2. Look for **Gemini Apps Activity**.
3. Turn it **Off** and select **Delete Activity**.
### Why did they do this?
From a product design standpoint, Google has moved features like "Smart Compose" and "Autocorrect" onto the same backend infrastructure as Gemini. By their logic, if you "opt out" of AI, you are opting out of the entire engine that powers those features. It is a controversial move that many privacy advocates have flagged as a "dark pattern" designed to discourage users from opting out.
Would you like me to help you find the specific CSS codes to hide the Gemini side panel more permanently in your browser?
ME:
I'd like to print this entire conversation.
GEMINI:
Since I am an AI interface, there isn't a direct "Print" button built into the chat window, but you can easily capture the full formatting using your browser's native tools.
Here are the two best ways to get a clean printout of our conversation:
### Option 1: The "Ctrl + P" Method (Fastest)
1. **Select the text:** Highlight the entire conversation from your first question down to this response.
2. **Right-click** and select **Print** (or press `Ctrl + P` on Windows / `Cmd + P` on Mac).
3. **Change the setting:** In the print preview window, look for a setting that says **"Selection Only"** (usually under "More Settings" or "Options").
4. **Print to PDF or Paper:** This ensures you don't print the sidebar or other website clutter.
### Option 2: The "Clean Copy" Method (Best Formatting)
1. Click the **Copy** icon (usually looks like two overlapping squares) at the bottom of each of my responses.
2. Paste them into a document (Google Docs, Word, or NotePad).
3. Go to **File → Print**. This allows you to adjust the font size and remove any extra white space before you print.
---
**A quick tip for the road:** If you ever decide to try the **uBlock Origin** method I mentioned earlier to hide the Gemini buttons, it works on almost any website element you find annoying. It’s a great way to "clean up" the internet without waiting for companies to change their settings.
Would you like me to summarize the steps for disabling Gemini into a single, one-page "cheat sheet" so it's easier to read once printed?
ME:
Yes
GEMINI: ## Gemini Deactivation & Privacy Cheat Sheet
This guide provides the steps to disable Gemini’s presence in Gmail while maintaining as much control as possible over your workspace.
---
### 1. Disable Gemini UI (The "Hostage" Method)
* **Location:** Gmail Settings (Desktop) → **See all settings** → **General**.
* **Action:** Uncheck **Smart features and personalization**.
* **Trade-off:** This removes the "Summarize" button, but you will lose auto-categorization (Tabs) and Smart Compose.
### 2. Block the "Side Panel" (The Visual Clean-up)
If the Gemini side panel or "Sparkle" icons still appear:
* **Manual Close:** Click the **Close (X)** or the **Side Panel icon** in the top right of Gmail to collapse the AI panel.
* **Ad-Blocker (uBlock Origin):** Right-click any Gemini element → Select **"Block element"** → Click **Create**. This "erases" the buttons from your screen without disabling other Gmail features.
### 3. Cut off Data Access (The Privacy Method)
To prevent the Gemini chatbot from "reading" your emails to answer questions:
1. Go to [gemini.google.com](https://gemini.google.com).
2. Click **Settings (Gear Icon)** → **Extensions**.
3. Toggle **Google Workspace** to **OFF**.
### 4. Delete AI Activity History
Ensure Google isn't keeping a log of your AI-related interactions:
1. Visit [myactivity.google.com](https://myactivity.google.com).
2. Select **Gemini Apps Activity**.
3. Toggle it **OFF** and select **Delete Activity**.
### 5. Mobile App Deactivation
1. Open the Gmail App → **Settings** → **[Your Account]**.
2. Scroll to **General** → Uncheck **Smart features and personalization**.
---
**Summary of Impact:** Disabling these features moves your Gmail back toward a "static" inbox. For a completely AI-free experience without losing functionality, consider using a third-party desktop client like **Thunderbird**, which ignores Google’s AI overlays entirely.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)