RMH
No title available
Jules of Nature
Kaledo Art
No title available
Peter Solarz
Claire Keane
@theartofmadeline
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
NASA
PR's Tumblrdome
Cosimo Galluzzi
Janaina Medeiros
oozey mess
will byers stan first human second
roma★
d e v o n
tannertan36
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
titsay
seen from Malaysia
seen from Spain
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Australia
seen from South Africa
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from United States
@hunkybeans
Legend of Zelda x Resident Evil AU concept sketches
When a major research institute in Hyrule goes dark right after sending a mysterious warning message, famed epidemiologist Dr. Zelda Bosphoramus Hyrule gets sent to investigate.
Cue zombies
Not quite the same but similar
Things to see around the city
Carney keeps on trying to get Brussels all hot and bothered with his “cooperation and rules based world order is still possible” speeches
I would like to share the story of a very understandable but unfortunate mistake i made at work recently
So I'm weeding our ancient and terrible collection of children's books for the first time in possibly ever, and I'm making a decision about a book about migrant workers by Sandra Weiner, called Small Hands, Big Hands. And I'm not 100% sure and I go to just see if there's anything out there about this book's being notable in any way so I do an open web search for
"small hands big hands weiner"
And then I look at my results for a moment
and then at last I somberly add to the end of my search, "BOOK"
I have one like that:
In mathematics, you often consider the two-dimensional plane - you know, the idealised flat two-dimensional object that extends infinitely - which can be real or complex (doesn't matter what that means)
On this, you can perform a mathematical operation called a "blow-up" (resulting in a more complicated geometry)
I needed to look up a formula related to this, so I confidently typed into the search bar:
"Blow up real plane"
The results were not what I wanted and I am not sure if I'm on a terror watchlist now.
I forgot the word for a threaded coupling, but no matter, I know that it basically looks like a short pipe with threads on the outside (a "nipple") but with the threads on the inside instead ("female" end connection).
A long female nipple.
And that's what I googled at work.
My phone sometimes does this "1 year ago" thing where it plays a reel of old photos to jazzy music, but I don't take all that many photos, so in practice my phone just sometimes offers me jazzy music over a series of context-free nearly identical photos of the neighbour's cat.
Occasionally I am reminded that I went somewhere a year ago when the music plays over context-free nearly identical photos of a different cat.
If I were Oroboros I would simply not eat my own tail.
kind of a side thought from a couple of my posts about writing but I think it deserves its own post, so here goes:
when you’re writing a conflict between two characters or factions of characters, you need to consider whether their disagreement over the premise or over the methods. put another way: do they disagree on the problem or the solution?
this is a genuinely tricky thing to identify, especially in very complex narratives, so let’s do some very simple examples.
the situation: pacifist nation X is about to be invaded by empire Y. the laws and cultural practices of the Xians make violence and death so abhorrent that even accidental death is as minimized as possible. the Ylings, on the other hand, are totally cool with straight up murder and think diplomacy is for wimps, but are also pragmatic enough that they won’t waste troops if they don’t need to. the king of X calls in his council and asks for their opinions.
character A: It is more noble to die for one’s beliefs than to live having broken them. We should allow the Ylings to invade us and if we die, we die. character B: If all life is sacred, then our lives are also sacred. We must fight back against the Ylings, even though that means we’d be committing violence.
A and B agree on premise but not solution: they both acknowledge that the Yling invasion is a bad thing that will lead to their deaths if unopposed and that the nonviolence code is important; what they disagree on is priorities and methods.
character C: We should invite them into our nation as honored guests. Maybe they’ll spare us or at least kill us more mercifully. character D: We should propose an alliance and intentional annexation in exchange for our lives. Being part of the Yling Empire is a pretty sweet deal, actually.
C and D agree on solution but not premise: they’re both okay with just letting the empire walk in and invade, but C thinks the invasion would be a bad thing and is just trying to minimize the damage, and D thinks it would be a good thing and wants to maximize the rewards.
character E: We should fight the Ylings and stay a sovereign nation; the nonviolence code is stupid and holding us back. character D: We shouldn’t fight the Ylings and try to be peacefully part of their empire instead; we’d be true to our code and reap the rewards of an alliance.
E and F disagree on both premise and solution.
Now, all possible permutations of this argument are fine. “Is this the best way to solve the problem?” and “What actually is the problem?” are both great sources of conflict. Captain America: The Winter Soldier’s entire plot is an argument over the methods to prevent death and crime, but everyone agrees that crime is bad; one of Zuko’s big character development moments is when he realizes that the problem with the world isn’t the other nations ungratefully rejecting the prosperity and unity offered by the Fire Nation, but that the Fire Nation routinely commits genocide in their quest to colonize the rest of the world.
The issue is when a disagreement over methods is treated like a disagreement over premise. The characters are positioned like one side’s entire worldview is correct and the other is wrong, but it turns out they actually disagree with what the other does rather than what the other believes.
A big giveaway that what you’re seeing is about methods and not underlying beliefs? If at any point it is said or implied that one character “goes too far.” “Too far” implies a point before that cutoff that the other characters or the reader would be okay with. You can’t go too far if going any distance in that direction is wrong. “Frollo in the Disney version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame goes too far when he tries to kill all the Romani in the city” implies that the problem isn’t racism in general, but mass murder specifically, and that if Frollo was only nonviolently racist, that would be fine!
Like, you know the joke about the guy who offers a woman a million dollars to sleep with him, then ten dollars after she accepts the million dollar offer, and when she’s offended and says she’s “not that kind of woman,” he says, “Oh, we agreed you were that kind of woman, now we’re just haggling over price”? If your characters are arguing about the best way to solve a problem, they have already agreed about the existence and nature of the problem. Now they’re just haggling over price.
Again: that kind of storyline is okay if you actually do want to discuss extremism v. moderation of the same basic principle. It’s okay for two characters to argue over the best way to free all of their country’s slaves. It’s also okay for two characters to discuss the best way of practicing slavery, if you want to show how ingrained it is in society or how even the character you think is a moderate is still evil or something. What doesn’t work is if your intention is to say how awful slavery is, but then the entire conflict is over the treatment of slaves rather than whether slavery is okay.
tl;dr: setting up the conflict as one over premise and then having all the action be a fight over methods undermines your story; at best it’s just confusing, at worst it turns your characters into hypocrites.
At the end of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Jim the slave, who has spent the entire novel on the run, is captured and will be sent back his master. The last act is about Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn's mishandled caper to free Jim. They fail, but in the end they get a letter saying Jim's master has died, and in her will she freed Jim, this solving the plot.
I really hated this since Jim never got to escape slavery, he was given his freedom by his master. It made it seem like the message was "Escaping slavery is wrong. Those in chains should treat their masters well and earn their masters' mercy."
The book disagreed on the method of escaping slavery. It agrees that slavery is wrong, but seems to think breaking the law and running away is "going too far".
If God's not real, then why are the numbers 6 and 7 in a direct sequence-- an obvious reference to the meme "6 7"? There are an infinite amount of integers, so there was an infinitesimally small chance that those two numbers would be in that order by accident.
Page on the theist argument if anyone's interested
the sacred texts. the op of this tweet deleted it which was heartbreaking the last time i tried to find it.
DUNE has not one but two factions of dommy mommies who are gonna take your cum without your permission
favorite genre of manosphere tweet. these are so funny to me. why are 25 year olds not conquering the world
The Life of Julius Caesar - Plutarch
(Crook voice) And I am not a crook...
I always wanted to be the guard that tells only lies
(Softly) Would the other guard tell me if you gave up on your dream of becoming a writer?
(clearly struggling with the logic) auuu I don't knowwww
Don't you mean you *do* know?
And if this stuff was shown to 13 and 14-year-olds via TV or YouTube incredibly conscientious gays like Jones would have defended it and said that there's a lot of sexualization happening the culture already so it's beyond criticism. 🙃
This is the art the students were shown:
It's fine. It's a bare ass. In art class? This is less obscene than captain underpants.
Meanwhile, what the teacher has on their personal website is their business and does not factor in. Even if it did, it's clear from the screenshot they're talking about the socio-political role children play within the context of horror movies.
Getting in a twist about this is quintessential reactionary conservatism and is something a purported feminist should not be doing.
your art makes me want to be gayer much love from new jersey
Thank you anon for the update
Yeah that’s the cycle. Keep following it until you escape the wheel of samsara. Good luck out there friend
Capitalism demands infinite growth
What’s been the hardest advice for you to swallow? Ever?
If you are correct and annoying, nobody will listen.
Like it does not matter how correct you are, or how beautiful your coherence of thought may be. If you're annoying, people will spend their time and energy elsewhere
I think this is at least part of why the US has seen a swing towards the right. Early 2000's lib smugness.
what type of friend are you
hairband/elastic band friend
tampon/period pad friend
painkiller (paracetamol/ibuprofen/etc) friend
battery pack friend
hand sanitiser friend
mints friend
other type of friend I haven't mentioned
(As in, what do you usually have on hand all the time that can benefit others. For example, i have hairbands and painkillers on hand everywhere I go, and thus im able to offer people these things if they need them)
Friend with a car
remember: your chances of getting stopped by riot cops decreases drastically when you act alone, at night, against some piece of critical infrastructure far away from the city.
dissolving styrofoam in gasoline is a fun science experiment you can do at home!
Sorry, Lib take incoming
I think attacking critical infrastructure is bad. Assuming we're talking about like, water/power/railroads/natural gas pipelines/telecom. All these things have teams of people whose job it is to deal with disruptions, so it's not something they have no plan for. In the meantime, you deprive a population of a utility temporarily. When the power cuts out on a cold winter night, the rich have somewhere else they can go and the poor freeze. I don't think that's what we want.
