🙂↕️🙂↕️🙂↕️🙂↕️
I really love Jacob Anderson
Game of Thrones Daily
🪼

Love Begins
YOU ARE THE REASON
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her

blake kathryn

Andulka

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣

JBB: An Artblog!
cherry valley forever
taylor price
Show & Tell

PR's Tumblrdome

Origami Around

Product Placement
No title available

No title available

★

No title available
Keni
seen from Australia

seen from Russia
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from Netherlands

seen from Austria
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Malaysia

seen from Türkiye

seen from Türkiye

seen from Russia

seen from Türkiye

seen from Syria
seen from Türkiye

seen from Switzerland
seen from Brazil
@cronusteeth
🙂↕️🙂↕️🙂↕️🙂↕️
I really love Jacob Anderson
how it feels to try and explain the how the bricks n minifigs scandal started with a minor civil dispute and has resulted in a man fleeing the country, a corporation destroying every single piece of respect or credibility they ever earned, an entire police department at the center of a large corruption scheme that involves mormons, and it’s all over $250k of LEGOS
A German regional court has ruled that Google is directly liable for the content of its AI search overviews. According to the court, previou
Let’s fucking go
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.
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.
This is why Pride is not just a party. It's a joyful celebration, but it's also a pointed and colourful two-finger salute to a world that stood back whilst so many of us died. And we'll never go quietly, never again.
This may be the best Pride merch I've seen from a major corporation.
Levi's said yes, actually. Assless chaps and a biker vest. Happy Pride.
And the assless chaps sold out on June 1.
They also specifically contacted members of the leather community, used them as models iirc, and donated $100k to Outright International. They talked the talk and walked the walk and put their money on it too. I don't really care that I can't afford and don't want this merch, I love to see my community getting the respect it deserves. Levi's said, "We make jeans which gays wear lots of jeans? Oh leather daddies? Let's call them."
I think Levi's donates to Outreach International every year too, as well as sponsoring pride events and other community support. They were offering Same Sex domestic partner benefits to employees in the 90s, and have been very public about their support for pro-lgbt legislation all through the 2000s.
So, you know, a giant corporation that walks the walk pretty consistently.
Gotta tell you guys something wild in the Chinese fan sphere
So some fanartist drew a “sexy” (read: booby) version of a (cartoon) character who is traditionally very non-sexualised. Fans of the character got mad about it because it’s kind of groundbreaking how that character is written and portrayed and this art totally ignores the entire point of the character. They demanded the art be deleted. In response to that other people said, well what the fanartist did may be distateful but they have every right to draw what they’re into. The two sides fight for days and each starts a harassment campaign and even report their “opponents’” accounts.
So far so typical. But things eventually come to a head and they decide that this will be settled by votes - not through a poll. Through donations to a children’s education charity via each side’s portal. Whoever can get the highest amount of donation wins.
And that is how this charity received over 1 million in donations in three days lol. Oh btw the “freedom of expression” side won by a landslide (960k to 40k)
From now on this is how all petty fandom disputes should be settled.
yeah yeah rainbow capitalism is bad and whatever but like. when I was a child, being pro gay was not the popular or lucrative choice. I'm happy that times have changed.
I miss rainbow capitalism. I do. I miss when it felt like public opinion was still pro gay. I understand it was always an empty gesture, but it mattered in a sense of knowing how socially acceptable being queer is. If that makes sense.
wishing the great earth were not so empty of my old enemy
She got the idea for the study while walking with her advisor at Stanford to discuss her thesis topic, and the paper she eventually published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology in 2014 is sharp enough that it should have ended the seated meeting on the day it came out.
She ran 4 experiments on 176 people. Same person tested twice. Once sitting, once walking. The creativity tasks were the standard ones psychologists have used for decades to measure how good a brain is at generating novel useful ideas.
81% of participants in the first experiment produced more creative ideas while walking than while sitting. In the second experiment, 88%. In the third, 100%. Every single person walked into a more creative version of themselves. On average, people generated 60% more novel useful ideas the moment their legs started moving.
The skeptical question is the obvious one. Maybe it was the fresh air. Maybe it was the scenery passing by. Maybe it was the change of environment doing the work, not the walking itself.
Oppezzo killed every one of those explanations with one experimental decision. She put people on a treadmill facing a blank wall. No scenery. No fresh air. No environmental change. Just legs moving in place while staring at white drywall. The 60% boost held.
Then she ran the experiment that closed the case completely. She took participants outside in two conditions. Half of them walked through a Stanford courtyard. The other half were pushed through the exact same courtyard in a wheelchair. Same outdoor stimulation. Same scenery passing at the same speed. The only difference was whether the legs were moving.
The walkers produced dramatically more novel high-quality ideas than the wheelchair group. The outdoors did almost nothing on its own. The walking did everything.
She also tested the opposite kind of thinking. Convergent thinking. The kind where there is one right answer and you have to narrow down to it. Word puzzles where 3 words share a hidden fourth word that connects them. The seated participants did slightly better on these. Walkers got slightly worse.
Walking is not a general intelligence enhancer. It does one specific thing. It opens up the divergent search inside your brain. The part that generates options. The part that produces unexpected connections. The part that takes a problem and finds five ways into it instead of one.
When you need to converge on the single right answer, sit down. When you need to find the answer in the first place, get up.
The mechanism is now well understood. Walking selectively activates what neuroscientists call the default mode network, the system inside your brain that runs when you are not consciously focused on anything. The DMN is where mind-wandering happens. Where memories cross-reference each other. Where ideas that have been sitting in separate folders inside your head finally bump into each other.
When you sit at a desk and force yourself to concentrate, you suppress the DMN. When you walk at a natural pace, the executive part of your brain gets just busy enough handling the walking that the DMN comes online and starts doing the work that focus was blocking.
The most useful finding in the entire paper is the one almost nobody quotes. The boost did not turn off the moment people stopped walking. Participants who walked first and then sat back down stayed elevated. Their next round of seated creativity work was still significantly better than people who had been sitting the whole time. The rest lingered for at least several minutes after the legs stopped moving.
You do not need to do creative work while walking. You need to walk before the creative work. The brain holds the state.
Edited down a long tweet. (x)
when you feel you have ideas that are above your skill level - do it. make it. create it anyway. you can only be good at somehing by first doing it and being bad. your skills will only develop with practice. the ideas you have now will not reflect the future you, so you may not feel inspired to do them then. so do it now, despite what the voice inside your head is saying.
Lestat walks from his hips and Louis from his shoulders
This sort of information is important to me
so many misguided metaphors around violence and desire. if the open maw of a panting beast fills you with the want to be devoured, that does not make you prey. while the rabbit trembles in fear, its deepest desire is to run. evolution demands it. in fact, the desire to be eaten does not make you any small animal at all.
it makes you a fruit.
step one: replace entire personality with open, festering wound
step two: contort absolutely all stimuli in my environment to relate to the my wound in some manner, ideally one which justifies random acts of unbridled aggression and vengeance
step three: marry a girl with generational wealth
I'm the funny one
i do think it’s also a bit poetic, all the men who’ve hurt claudia all get to forgive eachother, while she’s dead and nothing can change that. even when season 2’s ending has a much more fulfilling ending than that of the first book, the fact that even seventy years later after her death, and her memory is still being used to either absolve louis’s guilt or being exploited comercially, that leaves an empty and withering feeling inside.
louis and lestat get to grieve and hug, for a moment atleast. louis and armand get to smile at eachother at the auction. lestat’s not talking to louis because of the book yet the man who published the book without louis’s consent is “dan”. and i guess lestat’s also chill with sam barclay, the man who wrote the baby lulu plays, the minstrel shows that killed her passion for performing, who also wrote the script for the trial next to santiago.
it poses a personally interesting question to me, do these vampires ever truly change? can cycles be broken if you’re immortal? are you bound to fall back into your old habits? are they frozen in the same dispositions they have when they were turned? states of fear, or grief, or arousal? will they continue to hurt claudia long after her death?
losing it over this. unbridled chaos