frankenstein (derogatory) @coram-van-texel - Tumblr Blog

widow's bay. s01e02.

#I cackled at this #I’m on the widow’s bay train no unfortunately #honestly thought it might have been some sort of weird huge native marketing thing #because I felt like people kept talking about it in this weirdly direct way #but no it’s actually just a really fun show

lyril

cornedbeefhashtags

battletoads

wordfather

idk if this is an usamerican thing or not but it always blows my mind as a small european country resident that yall have many names and types of apples???? what do you mean its not just red yellow or green??? why is it so complicated??? who is granny smith????

wordfather

'whats your favorite apple' 'red' 'no i mean like what type' '??????' actual conversatiom i've had with a mutual from usa

wordfather

THIRTY TWO??????

phillyphillyphilly

Listen that doesn’t even account for all the weird shit local farmers are getting up to.

May I present the best apple:

wordfather

the world is so big and beautiful

plain-flavoured-english

As a Greek, in response to the current controversy about Matt Damon being cast as Odysseus, I'd just like to share that one of the moments that changed my brain chemistry as a kid was reading a novelized version of the Odyssey and coming across the following description of Odysseus when Circe sees him for the first time and thinks he's hot: "his hair curled like a clematis and his eyes were very brown".

So may I present my own casting choice for Odysseus:

plain-flavoured-english

Excuse me???

ruffboi-mags

you are right and you should say it.

instantduckninja

Is this the face of a man who would put his own infant in front of a plow to avoid going to war?

Absolutely not

You know who would try that shit?

Is this the face of a man who would defy the very gods to get home to his wife?

You know who would defy the gods just to show he could get away with it?

fluffmugger

The last thing Penelope's suitors ever see:

clarabosswald

"i asked chatgpt" "i asked grok" well i asked the alethiometer and it said ☼☼☼, 🍎 🍎, 𝚨𝛀 𝚨𝛀, 🕯🕯🕯, ⚗️⚗️⚗️, 🐜, 🍎, 𓆈𓆈

#so true bestie #hdm

dorywhynot

"Iorek Byrnison" Watercolor on paper, 11x14", 2026.

For "Bibliophilia," opening April 8 at Quirky Fox Gallery

#THATS MY FUCKING BEAR #Iorek Byrnison I will love you forever and forever #hdm #Iorek my dear

sztupy

A German regional court has ruled that Google is directly liable for the content of its AI search overviews. According to the court, previou

ayeforscotland

Let’s fucking go

made-in-manetheren

This is HUGE.

1. The court holds Google responsible for statements made by its AI, considering them Google's statements (search engines have limited liability for results in their engine as they're the words of other sites/companies/people), meaning when their AI lies/hallucinates they're liable for the defamation/harm resulting from those statements.

2. Google's defense that customers are generally aware of the lack of reliability and are responsible for fact checking was dismissed. As the court pointed out, that would "significantly diminish" AI Search's stated purpose and it can't be distinguished from Google's business practices/statements as a search tool.

3. Studies have found about 91% of Google's everyday AI responses are accurate, leaving millions of searches per HOUR with potential liability for falsehoods. 56% of correct responses weren't supported by the sources the AI listed. Both of which mean Google is now liable for a LOT more AI "errors."

4. Google was held liable for 80% of court costs in this case and this precedent is expected to reverberate around the world. This is a massive shift from the 3rd-party search provider role Google has previously played and it comes right as they've tied ALL searches to their AI search.

TL;DR Google reeeeeally stepped in it this time.

alianoralacanta

5. If the words are Google's, this solidifies the position of universities who demand that all answers from AI are fully cited. If all the in-line citations now have to be (Google, 2026), that's going to make it obvious when someone's trying to use Google as a source. There's still the difficulty with people who are academically dishonest by trying to pass off the AI writing as their own. 6. 91% accuracy is officially too low to use as a source of references, which means the AI can't be used as a source of references either. This makes it less legitimate for such purposes than Wikipedia of all places (Wikipedia might need date/time proof of when it was accessed for the reference to be valid, but at least it is possible to prove the link existed at a particular date and time). 7. This will help encourage the rollout of courses on how to avoid AI search for students who need academic accuracy, because it's statistically not good enough to use. 8. This strengthens the case intellectual property authors have against Google in the EU, as this is proof that an intellectual property transfer took place.