WTF do I write here @fireworkstaughtmetoloveagain - Tumblr Blog

ruushes

tattoo designs… but make it beaujes 💎💎💙💙

qucko-deactivated20151208

reblog this for good luck

Calm place 🍃

Bed head.

Bed head.

Please enjoy some shenanigans.

No Oryms were significantly harmed in the making of this reel (only a little rug burn I’m sorry Briar 🥹)

Fearne is me, Orym is @racetrackconlon (IG even tho I’m fairly certain they are on tumblr but idk their handle; update! They are same here but tumblr is silly and didn’t let me tag)

drill-teeth

Something I really struggle to get people to understand is that like. Sometimes there was no intentional homoerotic subtext, the author was just extremely misogynistic. Sometimes the author wasn't "secretly shipping" those two men, the author literally just hates women so much that they see them as being literally incapable of relationships with depth. Like this is kind of a big thing with misogyny actually. A lot of extremely misogynistic people truly believe that a man can only have meaningful and complex relationships with other men because they literally just think women are so inferior they only exist to birth children and clean the house. It's like when people say along the lines of "no one worships exclusively men quite like straight men do". It's just that phenomenon actually. That happens to be manifesting in a raging misogynist's writing. Writing a man character who literally only puts effort into his friendships with other men while completely ignoring his literal girlfriend or wife is actually an extremely straight thing to write. And that doesn't mean you can't ship those men or that there are no stories with actual intentional homoerotic subtext. I just think it's important to be able to recognize extreme misogyny in writing and acknowledge it without brushing it off and assuming good intentions when literally all evidence is screaming that this was a misogynistic writing choice and not a representing gay men choice.

countesspetofi

And it's ALWAYS worth the reader honestly taking a minute to examine whether or not there's a perfectly fine female character existing there in the shadow of the reader's own previously unexamined gender biases.

nayarazune

luis carazo is winning at dnd (hugging and kissing his homies goodnight)

bonus:

nayarazune

he keeps trying to collect them all like pokemons

jeniferprince

can we? 🥺

patreon // buy prints here

igorlevchenko-blog

Dragon Age 2: The Fall of House Tethras

...Bartrand believed the (lyrium) idol sang to him and forced his men to eat lyrium to make them hear the song...

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.

revvethasmythh

re: jack's lock-in scene in me3, i think it's actually pretty notable that she was vocally willing to walk away from the work she was doing with her biotic students if they hadn't been so effective/needed a teacher on hand to function. much of her growth is tied to how deeply she cares about those kids, as people, as family, who are getting far better and kinder training that what she was given. she was willing to walk away from them. that's pretty significant. and much as she offers "no strings" while the war is ongoing and she and shepard and separated, the hanging thread of "but if we make it out of this alive..." certainly implies that she wants strings. in fact, i don't even think she can hold herself to the idea of a "no strings" arrangement, given her scenes in the citadel dlc. how she talks about the relationship is not always in line with the way she behaves, or what she actually wants, which feels very apparent when she shows up on shepard's doorstep to tattoo a representation of herself on them. it's "no strings" but it's also "if you're ever hurt, barely breathing, lying under a pile of rubble at the ass end of this war, you're going to have something that tells the galaxy that you belong to me"