im so fucking determined to get better i swear to god lets do this bitch lets go
No title available
todays bird
art blog(derogatory)
Cosimo Galluzzi
occasionally subtle

Jimmy Eat World
Mike Driver
EXPECTATIONS
Interview Vampire Daily
Cookie Run:Kingdom Official!
Cosmic Funnies
Sweet Seals For You, Always
NASA
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
sheepfilms
Color Me Curious
Fieri Frames
YOU ARE THE REASON

#extradirty
The Stonewall Inn
seen from United States
seen from Iraq

seen from Türkiye

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Vietnam

seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from Colombia
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States

seen from Singapore

seen from Türkiye
seen from United States

seen from Ukraine

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Indonesia

seen from United States
@aarohipawarsworld-blog
im so fucking determined to get better i swear to god lets do this bitch lets go
If I had a bf, I would stare at him. Like a LOT...
Can we really blame Aziraphale and probably half of Soho for falling in love with him?
one of the best academic paper titles
for those who don't speak academia: "according to our MRI machine, dead fish can recognise human emotions. this suggests we probably should look at the results of our MRI machine a bit more carefully"
I hope everyone realises how incredibly important this dead fish study is. This was SO fucking important.
I still don’t understand
So basically, in the psych and social science fields, researchers would (I don't know if they still do this, I've been out of science for awhile) sling around MRIs like microbiolosts sling around metagenomic analyses. MRIs can measure a lot but people would use them to measure 'activity' in the brain which is like... it's basically the machine doing a fuckload of statistics on brain images of your blood vessels while you do or think about stuff. So you throw a dude in the machine and take a scan, then give him a piece of chocolate cake and throw him back in and the pleasure centres light up. Bam! Eating chocolate makes you happy, proven with MRI! Simple!
These tests get used for all kinds of stuff, and they get used by a lot of people who don't actually know what they're doing, how to interpret the data, or whether there's any real link between what they're measuring and what they're claiming. It's why you see shit going around like "men think of women as objects because when they look at a woman, the same part of their brain is active as when they look at a tool!" and "if you play Mozart for your baby for twenty minutes then their imagination improves, we imaged the brain to prove it!" and "we found where God is in the brain! Christians have more brain activity in this region than atheists!"
There are numerous problems with this kind of science, but the most pressing issue is the validity of the scans themselves. As I said, there's a fair bit of stats to turn an MRI image into 'brain activity', and then you do even more stats on that to get your results. Bennett et. al.'s work ran one of these sorts of experiments, with one difference -- they used a dead salmon instead of living human subjects. And they got positive results. The same sort of experiment, the same methodology, the same results that people were bandying about as positive results. According to the methodology in common use, dead salmon can distinguish human facial expressions. Meaning one of two things:
Dead salmon can recognise human facial expressions. OR
Everyone else's results are garbage also, none of you have data for any of this junk.
I cannot overstate just how many papers were completely fucking destroyed by this experiment. Entire careers of particularly lazy scientists were built on these sorts of experiments. A decent chunk of modern experimental neuropsychology was resting on it. Which shows that science is like everything else -- the best advances are motivated by spite.
As someone who took etiquette lessons, politeness is an incredibly effective tool for disarming bigots. You can either force them to reconsider their words/actions by directly and calmly confronting their behavior (by using the rules of society in your favor), or you can dip entirely while they appear to be in the wrong.
Both options are great.
Because the thing is, when bigots pick fights, they are 100% counting on you to get louder than them. Or meaner. They want you to react emotionally and provide fodder for their 'You're Too Emotionally Immature To Understand' cannon.
What they aren't expecting you to do is say one of the following phrases in a polite, concerned tone:
Are you okay?
That's not the kind of language I was raised to use with others.
Do you need a moment to think on why that wasn't acceptable?
This is no way to engage in intelligent conversation. Please try that again in a kinder tone if you'd like this to continue. (I really like this one because it lets you turn their public-shame rhetoric around)
For those of you who'd are spiteful and/or dealing with Fundamentalists/Evangelicals/generally shitty Christians:
What's happening in your life to cause you this much anger? I can't imagine hurting so badly that I need to hurt other people.
Who taught you it was acceptable to treat other people this way? Certainly not the Jesus I remember.
Whatever happened to 'judge not lest ye be judged'?
If I talked like that in front of my parents or grandparents I would be ashamed.
I think there's something you need to pray on before we try and have this conversation.
And my all time favorite:
"It sounds to me like there are some seriously dark and angry forces at work in your heart."
(Nothing stops a Christian bigot in their tracks faster than implying the Devil is causing their bigotry. But you MUST be calm, polite, and gentle with your tone and wording. It is absolutely fair to twist the rules and play them at their own game, but you gotta play hard.)
TLDR: It's much faster to use etiquette, politeness, and rhetoric reversal when eviscerating idiots online and in person, because they aren't expecting you to weaponize their behaviors back in their direction. Don't get angry, get spitefully polite! :)
Pt I good omens but i've never watched it
i've never seen good omens but it's all over my tumblr dash so this is what I've gathered can someone please confirm if i've got it right
there's a demon named crowley
there's a biblically inaccurate angel named aziraphale but like it's very sexy when the demon calls him 'angel'
the demon and angel have been married for 6000 years and they still keep looking at each other all sappily
Neil Gaiman is somehow involved, I think he's the writer but also he's on tumblr (uh, @neil-gaiman) and people keep questioning if he's real
is neil gaiman like a fandom inside joke why is everyone asking if he's real
there actors are called michael and david and amazon prime thought they were the same
there is a bookstore and crowley is sad
they kiss and it is very nice and desperate and crowley says we could have been us. i have no context for this. someone is going to heaven i think.
there is a god, i'm not sure if they're good or evil though
the demon wears sunglasses
it's a comedy but for some reason everyone's crying after whatever the last season was, are you guys okay
things are on fire
they are very gay
there was a book and at one point they switch bodies
more fire and crowley screaming
they are called ineffable husbands i dont know what that means
they fight crime or they do crime or they fight crime by doing crime i really cannot remember which
gay
this has also part II and part III :D
sun
tea, coffee
The most important question about s3, is David Tennant going to be set on fire?
If Amazon decide not to commission Season 3, I will personally set David on fire to make up for it.
I think it would be better for everyone if I were to be left alone in the future. Don't you?
(from go twitter :) <3)
Hippity-Hoppity Crowley
More than Meets the Eye: New Research Shows How the Visual System Contributes to Memory
When we use our working memory, we temporarily retain information in our brain. For instance, you are able to comprehend this sentence because you are briefly storing in working memory each of the words you are reading until you put them together to form the meaning of the sentence. The importance of working memory to many of our cognitive abilities is well known, but less clear are the neurological machinations driving this process.
A team of researchers has now demonstrated that the key to understanding working memory relies not only on what one is storing in memory, but also why. This is the “working” part of working memory, which emphasizes the purpose of storing something in the first place.
“We now know that our visual memories are not simply what one has just seen, but, instead, are the result of the neural codes dynamically evolving to incorporate how you intend to use that information in the future,” explains Clayton Curtis, a professor of psychology and neural science at New York University and the senior author of the paper, which appears in the journal Current Biology.
Specifically, the study focuses on both how we store the visual properties of our memories in the occipital lobe, where our visual system resides, and on how the neural codes that store those memories change over time as people begin to prepare a response that depends on the memory. In the Current Biology study, the response simply required people to look where they remembered an object that disappeared several seconds ago.
“The research makes it clear that memory codes can simultaneously contain information about what we remember seeing and about the future behavior that depends on those visual memories,” notes Hsin-Hung Li, an NYU postdoctoral researcher and the paper’s lead author. “This means the neural dynamics driving our working memory result from reformatting memories into forms that are closer to later behaviors that rely on visual memories.”
Textbook theories state that the storage codes for our working memory are stable over time. This means that the pattern of neural activity that stores a given visual memory is the same as when it was first seen and encoded—whether it is a second later or 10 seconds later. These patterns of neural activity store visual memories, providing a bridge across time between a past stimulus and a future memory guided response.
However, recent studies of animals indicate that these neural patterns are much more dynamic—in fact, the memory codes are not stable and, instead, appear to change over time in puzzling ways.
To explore this, Li and Curtis, who previously uncovered how our working memory is formatted in the brain, devised innovative methods to both measure changing neural dynamics and critically make the dynamics interpretable. To do so, they projected the complex neural measurements into a simple 2D plane, like the screen of your laptop or smartphone.
The video below depicts how the pattern of neural activity evolves during a working memory trial. Initially, you can see a bump of activity encoding the briefly presented visual target (pink circle) in both primary visual cortex (V1) and a high-level visual area (V3AB). In V3AB, this bump remains at the target location throughout the memory delay. However in V1, a line of activity evolves during the delay between where the person is looking (pink cross) and where they will move their eyes after the delay.
The researchers believe that this line reflects the trajectory of the shift of gaze that is being rehearsed in people's minds, but has yet to be executed.
Although previous work had documented neural dynamics during working memory, the reason for why these dynamics occur had remained unknown. These new results help address this mystery. They indicate that the dynamics reflect transformations of past sensory events— what we have just seen—into future memory guided behaviors—what we might do with the memory.
“We’ve now shown that mnemonic codes can simultaneously contain information about a past remembered stimulus and the subsequent behavior that depends on that stimulus,” observes Curtis. “The neural dynamics of our working memory result from reformatting memories in order to align them with how we use them in the future.”