Happy Pride Month!

No title available
Keni
trying on a metaphor
Monterey Bay Aquarium
DEAR READER

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
Stranger Things
$LAYYYTER

tannertan36
taylor price
No title available
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her

izzy's playlists!
Peter Solarz
Jules of Nature
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH

PR's Tumblrdome
tumblr dot com
Sade Olutola

seen from United States

seen from Italy

seen from Italy
seen from China

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Canada

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Brazil

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Poland

seen from Singapore

seen from Malaysia
@eryelshest
Happy Pride Month!
“What if poor people abuse the system?”
The system intrinsically abuses poor people.
Hope this helps.
"What if poor people abuse the system?"
Rich people abuse the system far more and out of pure greed, not necessity or desperation so idrc about that
If a system needs to be abused for poor people to get the help they need, I don't think poor people are the problem.
Why do white trans women treat the word doll like its an oppressive label forced upon them... grow up girl. No, no, thats an insult to children....
Seriously, whats with the ignorance regarding this term? It's not some cringe shit by cis gays like most queer/tme terminology tends to be. It's a word invented by Black/latina trans women... it's not the death of you. Come on now...
Help the crackers are doing this annoying shit in the notes
Starting a collection
blue sunset on Mars is a real phenomenon caused by the way Martian dust scatters sunlight.
Unlike Earth, where sunsets are red and orange due to the scattering of shorter blue wavelengths by our atmosphere, Mars has an extremely fine dust that scatters blue light more efficiently near the Sun.
So during sunset on Mars, the sky turns reddish-brown while the area around the Sun glows a soft blue. It’s the opposite of what we experience on Earth.
NASA’s rovers have captured this eerie sight
*Puts lightning rods around your lair* there, now you wont be able to fry idiots before they enter your lair
well that seems kinda rude
[tests it with a small lightning blast] wait. wait hold on..
[starts switching blasts to different lightning rods at varying distances]
ok you can hear the notes in that right? ok, hold on let me know if you recognize this one
[further musical-ish tesla-coil type sounds]
When the CEO of the company that didn't turn away Nazi business says "this isn't going to work" you know it's bad.
404 has been knocking it out of the park since they started. Please support their original reporting on this! If you subscribe to nothing else I highly recommend them. Their podcast is great too.
Planning documents for "Scout" say the plan is to "make people addicted" to the tool before adding new features.
if theres one thing that really pissed me off from my 3 years of architecture i took in high school it's learning about how we used to have all these little techniques to maximize or minimize heat or warmth and now we just merrily abandoned all those to have the same copypaste style buildings everywhere that are often INCREDIBLY unoptimized to the local weather and climate so we can just throw more money at our heating and cooling bills
where i live it is hot as balls approximately 80% of the year. i do not want a massive butt-ugly grey mcmansion with a huge echoey open-concept kitchen-livingroom-foyer-diningroom-staircase that has huge windows so i can have an hvac unit the size of a barge heaving and straining to keep it at a constant 72 the grees. i want a north indian traditional style home with small windows to force the airflow to cool, decorative grates to limit the amount of sunlight, and a COURTYARD with a POND *smashes unspecified large object*
I hate learning about instances of "oh yeah we know how to do that, we just don't".
Wait for the master.
The amount of confidence oozing from this dude
i re-watched it several times, looking for what he does differently. finally i spotted it. look at the line of motion in his strike. it’s not especially fast, he doesn’t wind up more than the others, and it’s not a matter of strength – the guy who knocked over the stand probably put more muscle into it. but there’s a unity of movement he has that the others lack. his body and sword are all one curve. everything moves at once along the same line.
from a physics perspective, that means all the force he’s applying is concentrated at the point of contact between his sword’s edge and the target, and it moves at just the speed that breakage propogates through the material. too slow and it wouldn’t have enough force; too fast and he’d get ahead of the break, shoving the target over instead of cutting it.
from a writing perspective, that means that i should focus on describing a master swordsman’s smoothness more than their strength or speed, and can also have witnesses be confused at the effectiveness of strikes that don’t actually seem all that fast.
Martial arts are all about physics, my karate sensei is has a mechanic/physics diploma and he loves to explain the biomechanics of human body and how this was turned into fight via martial arts. It’s a very good way to teach. The sword master has a larger stance of the feet, much more than the others, allowing his barycenter to lower and thus giving more stability. This, united with the movement of the sword that follows the angle of his body increases the power of the blow without actually using too much muscle strength. Pretty sure he’s also just tending (not contracting) the muscles under the armpits, near the rib cage, the serratus anterior. That makes a huge difference.
Above: The science of moving like a master of martial arts.
What was most interesting to me is size has no correlation to success for any of the people.
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)
[runs hands down face]
Okay this is the problem with sharing pop science stuff online and content aggregation accounts
The study is real, it's very easy to find by searching up the author's name + study. Give it a read yourself. It's written in a pretty accessible way imo.
Note that it does not put forward any explanations for why this effect happens, only that it does. In the conclusion it posits many possible reasons for why, and that it's most likely nothing to do with the specific action of walking, merely any semi automatic repetitive activity. They also acknowledge the study did not account for the social company the walkers were in, which is a pretty massive factor imo. Considering the conclusion brings up MANY alternative explanations and future experiment possibilities, it's decidedly not "killed every alternative explanation" like the tweet says. The actual paper ends like most scientific papers, listing alternative possible explanations, these are preliminary results, more research is needed, wider demographics of people need to be included, etc.
Another thing is the phrasing of these tweets are like red flags flapping in the wind to me. Any short form social media content that's 1. Pop science 2. Conveys absolute certainty 3. Ends with self improvement biohacking adjacent advice, should set off alarm bells.
Look at the implications that if the tweets were true, it would mean wheelchair users and people with mobility issues would be inherently worse at creative tasks.
So who is this person that's tweeting this, rephrasing this paper in a "helpful" way that is sure to get shares from people who really value being creative and are looking for any way to become more creative in their -
OFC ITS AN AI BRO
You wanna see what his recent articles look like?
CAN WE STOP GETTING BAITED INTO PLATFORMING GRIFTERS
Thank you! There were so many red flags in the first post's language. The original paper straight up says that the mechanisms weren't isolated! Also there is no single part of the brain responsible for creative idea generation, it involves communication between multiple brain networks.
Glad I wasn't the only person who looked at this and thought that it was weird to say this study is SO perfect when the way it's framed here directly implies that people who can't walk are inherently less capable of being creative than people who can.
I can't leave a reply but to the disabled people in the notes who now genuinely seem to believe their mobility issues have robbed them of their ability to be creative pls don't think that! That's not what this study said! You're dealing with ableist misinformation from an AI bro, the study did not make these claims. I encourage everyone who's shared the version without the corrections to take them down, this misinfo is hurting already clearly hurting disabled people and should not be spread.
i’m so glad goncharov happened pre ai slop era
#weird way to describe 1973 but i guess it’s accurate
I wasn't sure about letting this Hydromancer into the party at first, but it turns out her sword arm is unparalleled, and she only dabbled into Hydromancy so she could intentionally contain the enemy's blood after she rained countless slashes upon them like a meteor shower on the clear night sky for the express purpose of striking a pose, muttering "zan", and then releasing all of the blood on their wounds at once in a spectacle that the villager elder described "sick as fuck".
The job market is ROUGH rough right now. This Slime Girl I know, she's not found a single opening in high level zones as a boss fight, so she decided to settle for midboss, but there's not even midboss openings right now. Her statline is huge, but she had to settle for random encounter... In a beginner area.
We were hanging out yesterday and she kept complaining not just about the humiliation of having to be a beginner area random encounter, but also about how her whole thing just doesn't work against weak opponents: She steals moves from the party and then uses them against them, but she's only stolen dogshit beginner moves as of late, and it's getting to her. She stole [Aimed Shot] from a beginner Archer. [Aimed Shot]. Yeah I sure fucking hope you're aiming if you're using a bow. She also stole [Shield Bash] from a Brawler. Congratulations, you are using the shield as intended. She just up and left when she stole [Heavy Slice]. Didn't even give them loot.
She used to steal moves like [Earthborn Sun] and [Philosophy Of The Scorned], we NEED to do something. Her moveset sucks.
It was like the sun came out from behind the clouds...
Rather than distinctly male or female, the human brain is much more like the heart, kidneys and lungs – basically the same no matter the sex of the body it's in.
rb to make a biological essentialist mad <3
“This collapse is a telltale sign of a problem known as publication bias. Small, early studies which found a significant sex difference were likelier to get published than research finding no male-female brain difference.”
the notes on this are toxic - to help clear up any misunderstanding, here’s the actual science paper:
With the explosion of neuroimaging, differences between male and female brains have been exhaustively analyzed. Here we synthesize three dec
in short: brains are brains