Aqua Utopia｜海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
izzy's playlists!
h
noise dept.
No title available
No title available
occasionally subtle
Show & Tell
sheepfilms
Mike Driver
almost home
ojovivo
Peter Solarz
JVL
Sade Olutola
🪼
NASA
KIROKAZE
RMH
art blog(derogatory)
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Iraq
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Türkiye
seen from France
seen from Romania
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Iraq
seen from Spain
seen from Germany
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Singapore
seen from United States
@kizeen
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.
Help I'm choking on my toast
All Star but it’s in a minor key so it makes you question life and realize the years start comin and they don’t stop comin
aka, the theme song to Shrek 9: Shrek’s Third Divorce
FEATURING THE AMAZING @allicatttx
i need a full version of this pls
Sis voice tho!
i was NOT expecting to love this as much as i do
THIS GAVE ME SO MANY CHILLS OMFG
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.
If you’re a Non-Muslim and you see a Muslim praying in public, could you please not pass in front of them?
Go behind them, but not in front. 👍
Oh, signal boost! I didn’t know this.
Okay, but also: if you see a Muslim praying in public and they have something in front of them, like a purse or a bag or something like that, you can pass in front of them, but pass in front of that object.
it’s called a sutrah, and it’s meant to act as a physical barrier between the person praying and someone who might happen to pass in front.
Also, if you did this and didn’t know, please don’t beat yourself up over it. Now you know! Muslims aren’t supposed to pass in front of Muslims praying, either, because prayer is communication with God and you don’t want to break that connection.
Spread culture, respect customs, be good people. Simple as that.
Didn’t know this.
Reblogging again
THE AMOUNTS OF REBLOGS THIS HAS JUST MAKES ME SO HAPPY
S I G N A L B O O S T
Reblog forever !
Similarly, if a Jew is saying the Shemonah Esrei prayer (whispered, moving only the mouth, standing facing east with legs together) don’t go in front unless there’s a barrier.
does anyone have the link to that one sewing machine(?) website where someone forgot to close their HTML tags and the text just keeps getting larger and larger? i need it urgently
@parakavka thank you!
This is art to me
Embroidery Trouble Shooting Tensions to tight burrs wrong needle all your questions answered
There's a new mural in Szczecin
You forgot to add the best thing about it
They’re calling me every slur under the sun over on twitter for this post
Would you sell liquor to this baby
Yes
No
I don’t think life begins at contraception but I’d still sell liquor to baby
Wait hold on rb canceled that’s the wrong word wait no stop
Once when I was in undergrad, someone described something as “problematic” in class and our professor was like, “That’s cool, but ‘problematic’ doesn’t really mean anything. It means that the thing you’re describing has a problem, and in and of itself that’s not bad. Art, especially, should always have problems, or else it’s not interesting and not art, either. It sounds like you’re trying to say that this is bad, but you don’t want to say ‘bad.’ Is that right?”
So from then on whenever one of us called something problematic, he would make us talk it out until we could name the “bad” thing we were hinting at. In this particular class, 7/10 it was some type of oppression, and the remainder was like, “I’m uncomfortable because this is very new/confusing/pushing boundaries that made me feel safe.”
Once we stopped calling things “problematic” and stopping at that, class got way more interesting and... we all had to say, like, “that’s racist” or “that’s misogynistic” or “ew capitalism gross” out loud, which a lot of us had never done in a classroom before. Or we had to be like, “Uhhh... I’m not sure what’s so bad?” and confront our own beliefs and that was maybe even more useful.
Anyway. Whenever I see the word problematic, I can’t help but think of this professor being like, “Good starting point, now let’s get specific.” I think when we have to commit to saying “that’s ___” it requires a lot more careful thought about the truth and impact and complexities of whatever we’re claiming. Sometimes there really is some bullshit afoot, and also sometimes it’s art, and it should be full of problems, because that’s what art is.
I have to make mistakes in order to learn & grow
Meow
had a dream that there was this new tiktok trend called "scrubbing" where people would take images of fictional characters and put them in images of bathtubs and drag around transparent pngs of soap and brushes with their tiktok art tablets and like liquify tool their hair down to mimic giving them a shower. and people would get into flamewars in the comments of every single video over the types of soap they picked and if the images had decently removed backgrounds and if they got soap in their eyes. and it got onto the news because it turned out everyone doing the trend was doing it compulsively like they physically couldn't stop and each video was a solid few minutes long because they were just collectively obsessively recording themselves fake-showering these fictional characters and arguing about it online
for the record I have never used tiktok and like explicitly in the dream I learned about it secondhand from a discord server so there's that also which is funny I think
String identified: a a a tat t a t tt t ca "cg" ta ag cta caact a t t ag att a ag a taat g a a t t tt at tat a t t a t c gg t a . a gt t aa t ct g t t a t c a t ag a ct acg a t gt a t . a t gt t t ca t t t g t t a g t c t ca c't t a ac a a t g ca t t cct cg t a-g t cta caact a agg at t t c a tt a ct t a a at t ca a c t' tat a c t
Closest match: Mya arenaria isolate MELC-2E11 chromosome 1 Common name: Soft-Shell Clam
When gamers say "gg" they're really calling each other good girl
Always bear in mind that there is absolutely no legitimate evidence that Luigi was actually the one who killed the insurance company guy.
Of course he wasn't. He was at a party with me that day.
No but like literally, actually. All bits aside.
He didn't do it.
The cops very clearly planted evidence on him because they had to make an arrest because all eyes were on them and whoever actually did the deed was making them look stupid.
Why would the real killer hero have kept the weapon on his person and traveled two states over while carrying it and a manifesto in his bag, conveniently turning the crime into a federal matter? The same guy whose bag they found in a park, filled with monopoly money? Why did the police turn off their bodycams, take Luigi's stuff, drive a block away, turn their bodycams back on, go back into the restaurant, and then arrest him?
From the moment of his arrest, even left-of-center media has been presuming his guilt without examining anything (e.g. calling him "the killer" instead of "alleged" or "accused") and then when I say he didn't do it, the nearest person chimes in with some quip that tells me they think he did do it but should go free anyway. Don't get me wrong, I would have the same attitude if he had done it. But he didn't. It makes me feel like the only sane person in the world, even among my staunchly leftist friends.
comic where steve from minecraft sees a round guy
