If, when my toddler is, you know, toddling around saying “mama? Big ball?”
If I were lean down and say “unfortunately the big beach ball for some reason fills you with such an unadulterated rage that is beyond human comprehension that you scream until you pass out, so mama had to remove the beach ball from the premises until you can better regulate your emotions” she would simply stare at me like I had 3 heads full of equal betrayal.
The closest experience I've ever had to discovering "the vitamin" was buying a 100% wool outfit and wearing it in the winter.
Not only was I not freezing anymore, I was not sweating and overheating either. The horrible sensory nightmare of winter clothes disappeared.
In particular, I bought a pair of wool pants. They were a thrifted pair of fancy dress pants like you would wear at an important office job, and they were easily the most comfortable pair of winter-appropriate pants i'd ever worn. I wore them Every Single Day.
From that point on I realized a lot of my clothes were making me feel bad, and the common thread was polyester. Especially polyester blends.
It's a trap because the polyester clothes are the ones that always feel sooooo silky soft when they are in the store, whereas cotton, linen and wool can feel comparatively rough and scratchy. But when actually wearing them for hours throughout the day, it's the natural fibers that feel more comfortable.
Maybe the secret to sensory comfort is not about the presence of softness, but the absence of overloading sensations. Or maybe the sensory stress and agony is not triggered by texture of the fabric, but by how it breathes and regulates temperature.
Then there's the problem of clothing life span: polyester blends, no matter how soft they seem at first, become rough and scratchy and covered in hard, itchy pills after wearing them 10 or 20 times, whether or not they have been tumble-dried or even washed at all. (I tested it!) Linen and cotton become softer and more comfy the more you wear them, polyester but ESPECIALLY polyester blends become a constant stressor. Polyester blend t-shirts I used to love for their softness now feel bristly and irritating.
So now I'm trying to change my wardrobe to as many natural fibers as possible, and the more natural fiber clothes i have the more I realize that the plastic fibers stress me out. It's so easy to overheat or freeze in them and they're always degrading and becoming less comfortable and it sucks.
So this was mentioned in the notes (and I mentioned it there, too), but I know that sometimes those just don't get read. So here I will mention other natural fabrics.
Alpaca- my all time favorite. It is both warmer and lighter than wool, and if you have allergic reactions to wool, as I do, this is a great substitute. Alpaca socks are so great.
Cotton- the common fabric. Good for shirts, underthings, socks, pants, you name it. Good at wicking moisture and letting skin breathe, but can also be woven into warmer items such as sweaters. Good all around fabric. Can be strong and used for heavy duty clothing as well as delicate clothes.
Linen- the original warm weather fabric. The more it is washed, the softer it gets. Fabulous in the heat. Use it for bed sheets in the summer and you will never be hot in bed again. It can be used to make shirts, pants, shorts, and underthings.
Silk- great for warm and cool weather. Cool in the heat, warm in the cold, and beautiful no matter what. Can be made as a washable fabric, but usually hand wash or dry clean. Will wear like iron. If you treat it right, you can have silk for 20 years or more. Gloves, socks, underthings, shirts, pants, dresses, jackets, you name it.
Hemp- less well known but a great fabric. Resists mold like you would not believe! Used to make sails for sailing ships, as well as ropes during the age of sail. It was stronger than cotton when wet and would last longer due to the no molding thing. Less water intensive to grow than cotton, with many of the same properties of both linen and cotton. Can be used to make bed sheets, bath towels, shirts, underthings, pants, socks, pretty much anything.
Cashmere- Super luxurious! It is the shed hair of the Cashmere and pashmina goats. Usually made into sweaters, scarves, hats, gloves , and shawls. Super warm and soft. Hand wash or dry clean.
Angora- Also super luxurious. The shed fur of the angora rabbit. Can be used to make sweaters, hats, gloves, shawls, socks, and shawls. Warm, soft, and fluffy.
Mohair- The fur/hair from angora or mohair goats. Used to make sweaters, socks, gloves, hats, scarves, and shawls. Soft and warm.
There are also natural blends. These include (but are not limited to, and are not a complete list): cotton/wool, cotton/linen, cotton/silk, linen/silk, wool/silk, alpaca/wool, cashmere/wool, mohair/wool, etc.
Other natural fibers can include camel, yak, and other animal hair that is shed or clipped and then spun into yarn. Some are more available in certain areas of the world than others. I did not include bamboo due to the massive amount of chemical processing that it takes to extract the fibers. I also did not include lotus silk, byssus silk (sea silk), or any other experimental animal silk (such as the golden orb weaver spider silk) that has been made/created.
Natural fibers cost more to harvest, process, spin, and weave. They can be more difficult to color evenly, because like any natural material they have flaws and variations. This makes them more expensive to work with, which makes the clothing more expensive to produce and sell. But the items produced will last longer (theoretically), will feel better against the skin, and will be better for you in the long run for both you and the planet than clothing yourself in plastic. Microplastics will rub off on your skin, washing away in the washing machines and getting into the water supply. As the fabrics break down, they will become not only rougher against the skin, but also more difficult to mend and patch, limiting their wear life. But because they are plastics, they won't decompose and break down, continuing to pollute the environment unless they can be recycled.
Natural fabrics, in comparison, will become softer over time. They can be repaired more easily as they get holes or tears because the fabric will not have pieces break off like plastic will. It can be easily recycled, and will eventually decompose (which is why archaeologists rarely find clothing and textiles at dig sites), causing little to no damage to the environment. Rarely will a person be allergic to a natural fabric (WOOL! Argh!!!), and when they are, there is usually a protein, emollient, or fabric composition which can be a factor and can (usually) be mitigated, unlike with a synthetic fiber.
Don't get me wrong, synthetic fibers have their place and they have become very useful for certain things. But, we live in a time of fast fashion and high consumerism fueled by synthetic fabrics and exploited labor. Being conscientious of what your clothing is made of, what natural fabrics can do, how long they can last, and why and when you should wear them is a good way to start cutting down on waste while helping your body feel better. And you may find that by limiting the amount of synthetic materials you put on or near your body, that certain things might start to clear up (acne, rashes, etc.).
I know there is much more about fashion and fabrics out there, and I am 100% certain that there is someone out there MUCH more knowledgeable than me. But this is just some information I had and info dumped.
I'm a fiber nerd for similar reasons to you, headspace. If you'll humor me, I have a few unsolicited suggestions for looking for natural fibers in thrift stores (other than looking at the tags, naturally, but also since I don't always trust the tags, since fabric fraud or mislabeling isn't uncommon, and tags can be missing or hard to find).
Bast fibers like linen and hemp usually have a fair number of slubs and are usually woven for durability, because lightweight knits tend to unravel near the slubs just around the same time that the wear level starts to get Perfect.
If you're running through the racks and find a nice hand, remember that synthetics tend to absorb water poorly. Holding the fabric for just a moment and then rubbing the fingers together usually tells me if the moisture was absorbed, or if my hands are still sticky. Fabric softener and dry cleaning can fool me sometimes.
Same as the above, synthetics tend to reflect heat. If a fabric feels soft to the hand, hold onto it a moment. Silk and wool warm up slowly, but synthetics feel "warm" almost immediately. Plant fibers also warm pretty quickly in the hand, but will still absorb water.
Silk and wool are HEAVY on the thread level. A tightly woven silk jacket is way heavier than a poly or nylon one of similar thread gauge.
And although your assessments are largely excellent, pyroteknich, I have a few nits to pick:
Cotton gets WET and holds 36x its own weight in water, compared to ~6x for bast fibers and a little more for wool and silk. When it's wet, the water clogs the gaps in the clothes and prevents airflow. I mention this because I live in a humid subtropical area and sweat basically doesn't evaporate. Cotton means a swampy underside, or all-over-side if you're working hard enough or get caught in the rain. A notable exception to this is very loose and billowy clothing like gauzy skirts. I generally avoid cotton entirely because of its water-holding capacity.
Silk does wear like iron unless it gets wet, then it's very weak and abrades easily. Normal activities in my area will cause sweat to build up and that moisture will shred silks. Again, the solution is loose and billowy, and being choosy about which fabrics during particular times of year. I tend toward bast fibers in the warmer months and silks in the cooler ones. Reconstituted cellulose fibers like "bamboo", ramie, rayon, and so on have similarly poor durability when wet. Silk also stains very easily and HATES being in the sun to dry or for too long period, as UV light breaks it down, just something to be aware of.
And also unsolicited, I would like to share a few tips I've picked up for keeping natural fibers in good shape so they can get to that delightful broken-in level. We have very, very soft water in my area, so your mileage may vary.
If not handwashing, a top-loading washer, filled up completely with cold water, is pretty close to handwashing, on delicate settings.
Most of the time, "dry clean only" is a bunch of nonsense, except with suits or dresses made with water-soluble interfacing. People washed these pieces for how many centuries before dry cleaning existed? Yeah. Unfortunately, I don't know an easy way to find out if interfacings are water-soluble, except to give the piece a wash. I've restored dozens of stinky natural-fiber pieces that were discarded because the original owner's dry cleaning didn't remove the water-soluble odors, and I "restored" them just by giving them a nice wash. Sometimes a pair of suit pants or a jacket will start poking out the plastic interfacing after the wash, so yknow. Caveat washor.
Even if handwashing, strongly alkaline detergents or high heat will cause protein-based fibers like wools and silks to denature and degrade rapidly during the abrasion of washing. Vinegar will help, and mild curd soaps are best. If only washing wools, a little liquid lanolin mixed well with hot water and curd soap prior to adding to the wash water will help restore the fibers, making the garment more water-repellent, stronger, and more durable. Small amounts of detergents can be used to boost the efficacy of the wash if there is a lot of oil in the laundry soils.
Inversely, plant fibers prefer hot water and can withstand alkaline detergents well, making washing soda and borax viable additions, but hot water will often cause stains to set. I like to help remove the alkalines from the fabric by using vinegar in the rinse. Machine drying, even on "air dry" settings, will still cause static buildup in the fibers, making them slightly water-repellent and for myself, an extremely unpleasant sensory experience. I try to line-dry everything, which is difficult when showers and storms are unpredictable and frequent, and the humidity is 70%+ most days during the hottest part of the day. Still worth it, and indoor line-dry is an option.
Wools and silks are magnets for carpet beetles and clothes moths. When I'm storing clothes for the season, I wash them, gently lanolize the wools, make sure they're 100% dry, then heat up an oven with a baking stone to 200F (90C), line a metal sheet pan with parchment paper, cut the oven, and then leave the clothes in the oven for 30min to kill any eggs. Then I wrap them tightly with plastic bags and put them in plastic bins for storage, and I've never had a problem with insects since. I got the idea from bedbug treatments.
I hope that fellow sufferers from fast fashion and the electrostatic nightmare that is synthetic clothing can get a little something out of the years I've been working on this. I have pieces I've been wearing regularly for 15 years using these techniques.
Look, it's simple. If a person has to actively work to make money, they're not "the rich" and they're not the problem. A surgeon making $200k a year still stops making money if they stop showing up to do surgery, because they're still selling their labor. The radical discrepancies in how we value different skills are certainly a problem, but the guy who makes money when he doesn't even get out of bed is the one making money on the value of other people's labor.
“Because the truth is, tech doesn’t have an image problem. It doesn’t have a message problem. It has an intention problem. What’s wrong with the axe murderer who broke into my house is not that he hasn’t successfully persuaded me to buy into his narrative. What’s wrong is that he’s trying to kill me with an axe. Similarly, when you launch a product that’s designed to put millions of people out of work, block access to sources of verifiable truth, replace human creativity with slop, and lower the barriers to every sort of atrocity, the problem isn’t that you haven’t told the public a good story about those things. The problem is that you are trying to do them.”
Text of tweet under the cut because it is loooong.
But... Stochastic Parrots.
Timnit Gebru was fired from Google in December 2020 for refusing to retract a research paper, and every single warning that paper made about large language models has now happened at a scale the industry spent 4 years trying to make people forget about.
Her name is Timnit Gebru.
She co-led the Ethical AI team at Google. She co-wrote a paper called "On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots" with Emily Bender at the University of Washington and two other researchers. The paper was 14 pages long. It was submitted to a top AI ethics conference. And it was the reason Google decided that one of the most senior Black women in AI research could no longer work there.
The story Google told publicly was that she resigned. The story she told, confirmed by 2,695 of her colleagues in an open letter, was that she was fired by email while on vacation because she refused to either retract the paper or remove her name from it.
The paper had not even been published yet.
Here is what she actually wrote, and why every prediction inside it has now come true.
The first warning was about scale itself. Bender and Gebru argued that training ever-larger models on ever-larger scrapes of the internet would produce systems that appeared fluent but had no actual understanding of language. They called these systems stochastic parrots because they would repeat patterns from training data with statistical confidence and zero comprehension. The paper predicted that this apparent intelligence would fool both users and developers into trusting outputs that were structurally incapable of being reliable.
This was 2020. GPT-3 had just come out. The paper predicted the hallucination problem before anyone had a word for it.
The second warning was about bias amplification. The paper documented in detail that internet-scale training data contains systematic overrepresentation of dominant viewpoints and underrepresentation of marginalized ones. The models would not just absorb this bias. They would amplify it, because the optimization process rewards confident outputs, and confidence in language patterns tracks frequency in the training set.
The prediction was that hiring tools built on these models would discriminate against women. That healthcare triage tools would underperform on Black patients. That loan approval systems would entrench inequality while presenting their decisions as neutral algorithmic judgment.
Every one of those things has now been documented in deployment.
Amazon's hiring algorithm penalized resumes that contained the word "women" in any context. Healthcare risk scoring algorithms used by major US hospitals were found to systematically underestimate the medical needs of Black patients. Apple Card's credit algorithm gave wives credit lines 10x lower than their husbands for the same financial profile.
The third warning was about environmental cost. The paper calculated that training a single large language model produced emissions equivalent to the lifetime output of 5 cars. The prediction was that the race to scale would create an environmental footprint that would eventually rival entire industries.
In 2024, Google's emissions were up 48% from 2019, and the company explicitly blamed AI infrastructure. Microsoft's were up 29%, same reason. Both companies have now quietly abandoned the climate commitments they were publicly celebrating the year Gebru was fired.
The fourth warning was about documentation. The paper argued that the training datasets being assembled were too large for anyone to actually audit. Nobody at Google, OpenAI, Meta, or any other lab could tell you with confidence what was in the data their models were trained on. This was not a temporary problem to be solved later. It was a permanent feature of the approach.
In 2023, researchers discovered that the LAION-5B dataset, used to train Stable Diffusion and other major image models, contained thousands of images of child sexual abuse material. The companies that had trained on the dataset had no way of knowing. The paper predicted that category of failure 3 years before it was found.
The fifth warning was the one Google cared about most.
Bender and Gebru argued that the deployment of these systems would centralize linguistic and cultural power in the hands of the small number of companies that could afford to train them. The internet would become a place where the dominant voice was a statistical average of dominant voices, presented as a neutral assistant. Languages underrepresented in the training data would degrade over time as more web content was generated by these systems and fed back into the next training run.
This is now happening in real time. A 2024 study found that 57% of new web content in English is AI-generated or AI-assisted. Researchers studying low-resource languages have documented active degradation in translation quality, because the synthetic content fed back into training is itself worse in those languages.
The paper Google fired her for predicted the model collapse problem before model collapse had a name.
The mechanism behind why this all happened is the part of her work that nobody quotes.
Gebru's argument was not that AI is dangerous in some abstract sci-fi sense. Her argument was that AI is dangerous in a very specific structural sense. The technology was being built by a small group of researchers who shared similar backgrounds, worked at similar companies, and were rewarded for shipping products faster than competitors. The incentive structure made it impossible for safety, ethics, and bias concerns to slow anything down. Anyone inside the system who raised those concerns was either ignored, sidelined, or removed.
She was making that argument from inside Google.
Then Google proved her right by removing her.
The team Google had built to make sure their AI was safe was dismantled in 90 days because they did the job they had been hired to do. Margaret Mitchell, the other co-lead of the Ethical AI team, was fired two months after Gebru for searching through her own emails for evidence of how Gebru had been treated.
Gebru did not stop. She founded DAIR, the Distributed AI Research Institute, in 2021. The mission is to do AI research outside the control of the companies that have a financial interest in not hearing the answers.
Every prediction in the Stochastic Parrots paper has now been validated by deployment. Hallucinations are an industry-wide problem the largest labs cannot solve. Bias amplification has been documented in hiring, healthcare, lending, and criminal justice. Environmental costs are larger than entire small countries. Training data audits remain impossible. Model collapse is an active research crisis at every major lab.
The question worth sitting with is the one almost no one in the industry will say out loud.
Every researcher with the technical credibility to call out these problems watched what happened to her in December 2020 and made a calculation about their own career. The number of people willing to speak publicly about safety and ethics issues inside the major AI labs collapsed after that firing and has not recovered.
The researcher Google fired for warning about exactly what is now happening was right.
The company that fired her is now the second-largest deployer of the technology she warned about.
And the people inside that company who agree with her are not allowed to say so.
The cops very clearly planted evidence on him because they had to make an arrest because all eyes were on them and whoever actually did the deed was making them look stupid.
Why would the real killer hero have kept the weapon on his person and traveled two states over while carrying it and a manifesto in his bag, conveniently turning the crime into a federal matter? The same guy whose bag they found in a park, filled with monopoly money? Why did the police turn off their bodycams, take Luigi's stuff, drive a block away, turn their bodycams back on, go back into the restaurant, and then arrest him?
From the moment of his arrest, even left-of-center media has been presuming his guilt without examining anything (e.g. calling him "the killer" instead of "alleged" or "accused") and then when I say he didn't do it, the nearest person chimes in with some quip that tells me they think he did do it but should go free anyway. Don't get me wrong, I would have the same attitude if he had done it. But he didn't. It makes me feel like the only sane person in the world, even among my staunchly leftist friends.
Every time I see this quote I realize how poor even very smart people are at looking at the long game and at assessing these things in context.
One of my favourite illustrations of this was in a First Aid class. The instructor was a working paramedic. He asked, “Who here knows the stats on CPR? What percentage of people are saved by CPR outside a hospital?”
I happen to know but I’m trying not to be a TOTAL know it all in this class so I wait. And people guess 50% and he says, “Lower,” and 20% and so forth and eventually I sort of half put up my hand and I guess I had The Face because he eventually looked at me and said, “You know, don’t you.”
“My mom’s a doc,” I said. He gave me a “so say it” gesture and I said, “Four to ten percent depending on your sources.”
Everyone else looked surprised and horrified.
And the paramedic said, “We’re gonna talk a bit about some details of those figures* but first I want to talk about just this: when do you do CPR?”
The class dutifully replies: when someone is unconscious, not breathing, and has no pulse.
“What do we call someone who is unconscious, not breathing, and has no pulse?”
The class tries to figure out what the trick question is so I jump over the long pause and say, “A corpse.”
“Right,” says the paramedic. “Someone who isn’t breathing and has no heartbeat is dead. So what I’m telling you is that with this technique you have a 4-10% chance of raising the dead.”
So no, artists did not stop the Vietnam War from happening with the sheer Power of Art. The forces driving that military intervention were huge, had generations of momentum and are actually pretty damn complicated.
But if you think the mass rejection of the war was as meaningless as a soufflé - well.
Try sitting here for ten seconds and imagining where we’d be if the entire intellectual and artistic drive of the culture had been FOR the war. If everyone thought it was a GREAT IDEA.
What the whole world would look like.
Four-to-ten percent means that ninety to ninety-six percent of the time - more than nine times out of ten - CPR will do nothing, but that one time you’ll be in the company of someone worshipped as an incarnate god.
If you think the artists and performers attacking and showing up people like Donald Trump is meaningless try imagining a version of the world wherein they weren’t there.
(*if you’re curious: those stats count EVERY reported case of CPR, while the effectiveness of it is extremely time-related. With those who have had continuous CPR from the SECOND they went down, the number is actually above 80%. It drops hugely every 30 seconds from then on. When you count ALL cases you count cases where the person has already been down several minutes but a bystander still starts CPR, which affects the stats)
That Vonnegut quote brings this particular moment to mind:
Yes, it’s just a pie. Yes, the pie itself doesn’t do much direct damage in the grand scheme of things. But the pie is resistance, and resistance inspires resistance. Resistance inspires survival. Throwing pies sometimes starts a movement. Throwing pies sometimes saves lives.
And of course, we haven’t spoken about the inherent morality of throwing pies at oppressors in a world where oppressors have outlawed pie throwing. At the very least, pie throwing is a reminder to the oppressors that no matter how much money they have, no matter how much power they have, there are still some people, some moments they can’t control.
I’d rather go out throwing pies than just rolling over and accepting that pie throwing isn’t going to solve anything. Yeah, the pie throwing doesn’t immediately solve the problem, but it doesn’t have to because it’s just a starting point. So throw the damn pie.
Speaking of the effects of pie throwing and art in opposition of oppression, and “resistance inspires resistance”:
Imagine sitting in a packed auditorium and some asshole is up front is spouting bullshit about minorites. Like saying they’re filthy and deserve a violent death etc. And there are lots of people nodding along and even cheering and applauding
But no one is saying or doing anything to disagree, so you think that you’re the only one who opposes the speaker. And you don’t want to say anything because you don’t want their ire or violence to be aimed at you
So you go through the entire speech, and possibly your entire life, thinking you’re alone
BUT if just one person has the courage to speak up, to throw a pie, to project art on the screen behind the speaker, then that single act of resistance will inspire others to do the same. It could even inspire you to stand up. Or if you’re the first, then you can inspire others
The No Kings protests absolutely did do something. Just tune into your local city council meeting the next week and see public forum. Chances are there’s a public official advocating resistance of all and any federal orders, or a local housing/immigration activist saying it helped them and then pointing that energy in the direction of more.
3.75% of the entire country was in the streets on Saturday. Might not sound like a lot, but those are the kind of numbers that signal a toppling government or a revolution.
If nothing else it proves to wannabe authoritarians that they can sure fucking try, but they can’t kill us all.
every single outspoken anti-war protestor did do something. Muhammad Ali famously refused to join the war, which in turn inspired people to draft dodge, or help others draft dodge. Every person dodging the draft is one less person shooting at someone during a war, and one less person likely to die.
I love going trough the notes every time bc there’s always someone in the notes insisting we’re all mean and that you can just wear thick dish gloves over your fake nails as if I wouldn’t assume you’re going to Patrick Bateman my ass if you walked into the bedroom with claws and yellow rubber gloves
TIL a family in Georgia claimed to have passed down a song in an unknown language from the time of their enslavement; scientists identified the song as a genuine West African funeral song in the Mende language that had survived multiple transmissions from mother to daughter over multiple centuries (x)
In 1997 Amelia’s daughter, Mary Moran, and other members of the Moran family were invited to Sierra Leone, West Africa, where they were welcomed in Freetown by Sierra Leone’s President and then flown by helicopter to the country’s interior. There, in the small village of Senehun Ngola, Mary and Bendu Jabati met and sang this song together for the first time. Years earlier, Bendu’s grandmother had told her that this song, which had been passed down in her village from mother to daughter for centuries, would one day reunite her to long-lost relatives.
In addition to finding out where in Africa her ancestors were abducted into slavery, Mary Moran discovered the meaning of the Mende song: a processional hymn for the final farewell to the spirit, it was sung in Senehun Ngola by women as they prepared the body of a loved one for burial.
(The OP's link leads to a site with a recording of the song sung by both Mary Moran and her mother, Amelia)
Because the original link was broken, I tracked down a news story about how the song is continuing to help Mary Moran's relatives find their African communities:
Also, there's an apparently sanctioned link to the full documentary about tracing the song.
I was really fascinated to learn that the song was originally recorded by none other than Lorenzo Dow Turner, the founder of Gullah studies. Gullah was dismissed (by white people) as a nonsense language until a Black linguist trained on Old and Middle English came along in the early 20th century, and I love him.
Character duo where one *remembers I don’t like fitting characters into trope boxes* is a completely fleshed out and realised person *remembers treating characters as real people and not story devices written with intent is bad* who is written by the author and *remembers death of the author* uh. And *fumbles and drops my pile of queue cards* ah fuck wait no *the menacing horse* what was that.
origamiaround
jacobvanloon
turnnoffyourmind
blakekathryn
kaledo-art
stormborns
yousharknotpass
