will byers stan first human second
Discoholic 🪩
dirt enthusiast
noise dept.
d e v o n
hello vonnie
RMH
Sweet Seals For You, Always
Aqua Utopia｜海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
taylor price
One Nice Bug Per Day
Andulka
styofa doing anything
if i look back, i am lost
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
NASA
@theartofmadeline
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
Kiana Khansmith
Xuebing Du
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Malaysia
seen from Poland
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from France
seen from United States
seen from Palestinian Territories
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Greece
seen from Germany
seen from United Kingdom
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Germany
@hekspiration
I was looking up facts about Cormorants to find a title for this and found out about the liver bird a mythological creature from liverpool that is literally just a cormorant which I find kinda funny
anyway still think what to call this maybe UKAI
Video games kinda suck at designing female heroes
In 2002, the photographer Howard Schatz published a photo collection called "Athlete" featuring pictures of, well, various top athletes from every sport and genre. These are some of the women he photographed, and the thing I want you to do in your head is compare the variety of humans that you're seeing here to the variety of humans you see in the cast list of your favourite video games.
These women are all in peak human condition for their fields - if you wanted to design a character who is tough and strong, these are the kinds of bodies you should look to for reference on what that looks like. You tell me how many video games or comics or movies or anime create their characters with even this limited variety in shape and size.
Of course, realism is not the end-all and be-all, fantasy characters don't need to be realistic, but if you are given the chance to make a character look like literally anything and justify it by "magic," and the only thing you do is reproduce the same 3 or 4 generically hot women over and over again, you are doing character design very poorly, in my opinion.
the hq photo of both men and women
Character in Context opens tomorrow at @armitchellmuseum and curated by @ellistrator
Opening Reception from 5-8pm.
Return to Lilac Wood | 9x12” watercolor and pencil on Arches (please contact gallery for purchase inquiries)
Inspired by my deep love for The Last Unicorn
a sluge 😔
Oh huh! I hadn't realized I didn't post this one here on Tumblr! I finished this study in early March and have plans to have it be one of 3 pieces to go together 🙂↕️
[ID: Digital painting of Sherlock Holmes and Toby the dog, a study of Leyendecker's "Man with a dog" (1909) for Collier's Weekly. Holmes is in his coat, striped pants, top hat and grey scarf, Toby following a trace by his side. They are painted mid-motion. /end ID]
what if it GETS her though 😥
houseplant type friend
Ummm she's literally sensitive :/
in fucking Tears thinking about how disgusting a baby griffin would look
behold. my ugly son.
Species accurate version
wretched little creature
Living Wall
These vegetated surfaces don’t just look pretty. They have other benefits as well, including cooling city blocks, reducing loud noises, and improving a building’s energy efficiency.What’s more, a recent modeling study shows that green walls can potentially reduce large amounts of air pollution in what’s called a “street canyon,” or the corridor between tall buildings. For the study, Thomas Pugh, a biogeochemist at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology in Germany, and his colleagues created a computer model of a green wall with generic vegetation in a Western European city. Then they recorded chemical reactions based on a variety of factors, such as wind speed and building placement. The simulation revealed a clear pattern: A green wall in a street canyon trapped or absorbed large amounts of nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter—both pollutants harmful to people, said Pugh. Compared with reducing emissions from cars, little attention has been focused on how to trap or take up more of the pollutants, added Pugh, whose study was published last year in the journal Environmental Science & Technology. That’s why the green-wall study is “putting forward an alternative solution that might allow [governments] to improve air quality in these problem hot spots,” he said.Compared with reducing emissions from cars, little attention has been focused on how to trap or take up more of the pollutants, added Pugh, whose study was published last year in the journal Environmental Science & Technology. That’s why the green-wall study is “putting forward an alternative solution that might allow [governments] to improve air quality in these problem hot spots,” he said.
Full Gallery
@rayatii @themousefromfantasyland @professorlehnsherr-almashy @the-blue-fairie @amalthea9 @tamisdava2
Every time OP dances, her parrot flies along with her. OP says she never trained it on purpose and her parrot just loves doing this naturally. Sometimes it’ll just hop right onto her face. (cr 月下郭城)
Help I love him so much
Wolf Pup
Witch Hat Atelier fanart.
Théodore Gudin - Smugglers' cave in the moonlight (1866)
Lego's Q3 2025 earnings announcement, October 2025
So Lego just posted another monster quarter and everyone's doing the usual "timeless appeal of analog play in the digital age" garbage and like, no, the actual story is that Lego is a privately-held Danish family company that spent the 2000s nearly going bankrupt and came out of it having figured something out that almost nobody in consumer products has figured out, which is that your core IP is the manufacturing tolerance.
Here's what I mean. A Lego brick made in 1958 still clicks perfectly onto a Lego brick made last week. That is not a marketing claim, it's a manufacturing fact, and it's enforced by tolerances measured in like two thousandths of a millimeter — the stud diameter variance on a standard 2x4 brick is famously smaller than most medical device manufacturers hit on parts going inside human bodies. Which sounds like trivia until you realize it's the entire business model: every brick ever made is compatible with every brick that will ever be made, which means the installed base isn't a depreciating asset, it's an appreciating one, because every new set expands what you can do with the bricks already in your kid's bin (and your bin, and your dad's bin in the attic).
Now compare this to basically every other toy category. Hot Wheels from 1972 don't interface with Hot Wheels from 2024 in any meaningful way — they're both little cars, sure, but the track systems have changed, the scales have drifted, the accessories are incompatible. Barbie has gone through probably a dozen body molds. American Girl dolls from the 90s have different proportions than the current ones. The entire video game industry is structured around planned incompatibility — your Switch games don't work on Switch 2, your Xbox 360 discs mostly don't work on Series X. Incompatibility is the business model, it's how you get people to rebuy.
Lego said no. Lego said the brick from 1958 will fit the brick from 2058. And this is insane, if you think about it, because it means they have voluntarily foreclosed on the single most powerful lever in consumer products, which is forcing obsolescence. Every company that sells a durable good spends enormous amounts of R&D figuring out how to make this year's product not work with last year's product without pissing the customer off too much. Apple is a master at this, Microsoft is slightly worse at it, car companies have built entire industries on it (proprietary charging connectors, OBD-II access, right-to-repair fights). Lego just... doesn't do it.
What they get in return — and this is the thing the "timeless analog charm" people miss — is that the brick becomes infrastructure. A Lego brick is not really a toy. It's a piece of durable manufacturing infrastructure that gets distributed into hundreds of millions of homes worldwide, and every new set is basically an expansion pack for an operating system that already has universal install. Which means the network effects are doing most of the work. When a grandparent buys a Lego set for a kid, they're not buying "a toy" in the sense that a Mattel product is a toy — they're depositing compatible substrate into an accumulating household stockpile, and every deposit raises the marginal utility of the next deposit.
This is also why the IP licensing deals (Star Wars, Harry Potter, the recent Nintendo stuff) work for them in a way they work for basically nobody else. When Hasbro does a Star Wars license, they're making Star Wars figures that sit on a shelf. When Lego does a Star Wars license, they're making bricks in Star Wars configurations, which means even if the kid loses interest in Star Wars in six months, the bricks get absorbed into the general pool and keep producing value. The license is temporary, the substrate is permanent, and the substrate was already the valuable part.
The near-death experience in the early 2000s is the instructive piece here, because Lego almost lost this. They went on a diversification binge — theme parks, video games, clothing, Galidor (look it up, it's hilarious) — and they started loosening the tolerances on the actual bricks because the bricks were seen as a commodity and the "brand" was seen as the valuable part. Which is exactly backwards. Jørgen Vig Knudstorp comes in in 2004, basically says the bricks are the company, tightens tolerances back up, narrows the product line, and the company starts printing money again. The takeaway the business press drew was "focus on your core competency" which is such a domesticated reading of what actually happened — the actual lesson is "the boring manufacturing discipline IS the moat, and when you think the brand is the moat, you are about to destroy the company."
Which is interesting because right now there's a huge knockoff market — Mega Bloks, Chinese brands like Lepin (which got sued into oblivion), various others — and they make bricks that are almost compatible with Lego. Almost. And it turns out almost-compatible is actually worse than incompatible, because when a kid tries to fit a knockoff into a real Lego build and the stud is 0.03mm off, the whole structure gets wobbly, and the kid learns not to mix them. The tolerance is a credential. You can counterfeit the shape but you can't counterfeit sub-thousandth precision at scale without becoming, essentially, Lego.
Anyway, the Q3 number is like 13% up year-over-year in a consumer products environment where basically nothing is growing, and the analyst takes are all about "emotional connection" and "intergenerational brand equity" which — sure, fine, those are downstream effects. The upstream cause is that a Danish family spent fifty years obsessing over whether their plastic rectangles were within two thousandths of a millimeter of spec, and it turned out that was the whole game.
Viktor Schramm - "During the fitting" (1900)
jellyfish lifecycles piss me off a little bit
you don't have to do that. you can just not do that
:D they can do more :D (x)
STROBILATION
Thinking about how Good Omens tv show was presented as like... gift to Terry Pratchett. Sort of love letter to his work...Thanks for the colab....a fulfilled promise..."What Terry would have wanted." etc.
And then when I watched even just the first season and few episodes of the second... I felt like it was just too much Neil Gaiman. You know? With way too many scenes n ideas that I am damn sure were thought up/written by Pratchett missing... and with way too many scenes that I thought were Gaimans work there and amplified... Leaving the whole vibe so off, that I left the show be, even before all the things about Gaiman surfaced to the light...
and after that, even the idea of re-reading the book itself (previously much much much beloved) left a sour taste in my mouth...love for Terrys work on it isn't enough.... Gaimans acts overshadow all... once again...
Yeah, watching the first few episodes of the show spoiled the book for me. The fucking scene where they're drunk and talking about the end time at the bookstore I feel was done specifically to harm the memory of Terry Pratchett, there's no way they fucked it up that bad unintentionally.
Yea... I was looking forward to that scene and it was so incredibly off, that it ended up as one of the few scenes I remember from it...
Prev tags: 100%
When the show first came out, I desperately wanted to like it. Good budget, one of the authors was involved, cast & crew were passionate about it; it felt like a rare good adaptation was in the cards.
By the end of the s1e1 graveyard scene I was already slightly cringing: the pacing and delivery of the jokes were off, the characters didn't feel right. By the time Crowley suggested they kill the Antichrist (a stark departure from the book, where Aziraphale is the one who comes closest to genuinely entertaining and following through on the idea), I was wincing.
By the time they fumbled THE DOVE SCENE, one of the earliest iconic scenes in the book that make it clear these characters are not their stereotypes, I could already see they didn't care about the themes or what made the story special.
