trying on a metaphor
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
Three Goblin Art

Discoholic 🪩
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
Cosimo Galluzzi
RMH

★
NASA
cherry valley forever
Claire Keane
Cosmic Funnies

ellievsbear
tumblr dot com
Sade Olutola
Xuebing Du
i don't do bad sauce passes
Sweet Seals For You, Always
styofa doing anything
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
seen from Singapore
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Norway

seen from Tunisia
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
@maomeimei
In the 2000s, phones had quirks and class....
In the ye olde days, when technology allowed phones to become small but there was no general concensus on what a phone should/ought to look like, it was like the wild west of phone design. The crazier it was, the higher the prestige. Phones back then did two things and they did them with flamboyance.
And then Steve Jobs ruined everything.
The people who insist AI is smarter than a human are doing their fucking damnedest to manifest that
Occasionally forget people genuinely think capitalism is thousands of years old
One time I was talking about Robin Hood with some coworkers and one guy was like “he was bad because the people he helped learned to expect handouts” and I wanted to be like… okay can you explain how that flawed capitalist propaganda applies to feudalism
reminder that capitalism was literally invented in the 16th century
That’s an exaggeration. What was invented in the 16th century was mercantilism. Capitalism really dates for the beginning of the nineteenth century, with the rise of industry and cash crops over artisans and merchants. Vulture capitalism, with the notion that companies have no duties other than generating profit, is even younger.
Capitalism is only 200 years old and I have to say, they have not been an impressive 200 years
I think a lot of this comes from the fact that most people don’t know the formal definition of capitalism. We all know the word, we’ve all seen the jokes, but very few people bother to actually define it unless they’re talking about political theory and philosophy, so it’s easy to end up with the impression that Capitalism = Money Can Be Exchanged For Goods And Services.
Capitalism is the economic system where most of the means of production (i.e. everything people need to have to make the stuff that everyone wants) are owned by private individuals or corporations, who then hire people to provide the labor necessary to produce things, with the intent of selling the output at a profit. It’s the difference between “you’re a carpenter and you make a chair and you sell it” and “you’re Richard Q. Richington who owns a chair factory, and you pay people to sell the chairs you paid other people to make and then all the excess money goes back to you.” There have been Richard Q. Richingtons on and off throughout history, but that being the norm for every single industry is a pretty recent development.
An alarming amount of people seem to think capitalism = all trade, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence.
Dont know if you'd ever need this, but here's a breakdown why if you want supernatural cutting power, the Japanese way is actually better for it than european swords.
You have probably heard of Japan's shitty native iron, forcing them to adapt to their limited supply by becoming really, really good at using that steel for blades... But it actually goes deeper than that because the way these blades were forged as a result means that they were made with way stronger backsides(the non sharp parts), ehich means that you can out a lot more force behind the actual cut.
Meaning yes, it's sharper than european swords, but it's also capable of harnessing more force into the cuts.
On the flipsides, this also means that even if the sword was made from superior European or indian steel, the sword STILL would also be way more likely to break, because the same factors that allows for more force applied, also makes the blade way more riggid in its construction, meaning that one bad move will snap it in half.
Bad yes, but not so bad if you fight in a place where shields arent a thing.
By contrast, the European swords like the norse longswords that became the base for... Every sword ever made in the west, is made in such a way that it's base is way more springy and flexible, because in a culture where shieldwalls were the dominant way of fighting, you simply cannot afford a weapon that will lodge itself in the enemy shield.
This was such a common thing that what little we know about direct norse martial arts is in large part about taking advantage of people doing exactly that, which is one of the reasons the relatively soft norse shields had that metal part in the middle to protect the hand istelf from both arrows and melee strikes.
But what this also meant is that the Norse and other europeans never really went all in for a stronger, single edged blade with more cutting power, because it would be useless in shield based warfare.
Completely opposite of japan.
Only once guns became a thing, and shields became obsolete as a weapon of war, did the single edge with a stronger back become part of European mainstay swords.
Early european sabers weren't quite there, but you can easily spot where they began adopting more eastern designs for weapons to be used at horseback as shieldwalls became a thing of the past.
Incidentally, you might have heard that sabers and curved swords are better to be used on horseback because the momentum reduces the chances of it being caught and snagged in the human body.
This is true, but as you might have figured out from all of this, ALL the same reasons that genuinely made the katana just flat out better at cutting things than a longsword applies same to a saber.
The lack of that age old springy back in fabor of a more rigid, harded spine means you can channel more force into the cut, which are also now from horseback, and often delivered while the swinger is in a charge with all the momentum behind him.
Best of both worlds really. The superior Shot and pike cavalry of europe(which reached its peak in Poland-lithuania in the form of the winged hussars), and the genuinely sharper blades of the east.
That said, the same cons still remained, with the saber being way less durable and easy to destroy than a longsword... while the actual European succesors instead shifted to specialize into newer forms of killing.
The more advanced metalurgy that forged cannons also allowed for way bigger swords, so professional soldiers adapted the double sided blade to just be bigger, creating the claymore and zweihander massive longswords so big they could be used both as blades and makeshift short pikes if need be.
And for the one handed option, they invented the rapier, pound for pound the deadliest blade ever made.
No joke, if you want the deadliest weapon ive mentioned so far, the rapier is it. Once big shields were gone, the europeans could go all in on stabby stabby, no matter how thing the blade was... which incidentally made a sword it was ridiculously easy to kill someone with, because as the romans proved with their stabby stabby gladius, being stabbed is way more instantly lethal or decapacitating than being cut.
Hence it became to go to for both soliders of the non zweihander variety and duelists.
In fact, the one time where there was serious conflict between Eurpean and japanese melee fighters, when some spanish marines fought on a ship boarding against japanese pirates, the rapiers made short work of their Japanese counterparts.
And for added bonus, it was immensely adaptable in mixing with pikes and guns, making it, again, the inarguably most successfull battlefield weapon on this list.
Katanas, longswords, zweihanders, and sabers were weapons used by specialized units, not the main weapon of the day, which was generally guns or spears.
The rapier, not so much, because at the height of the swedish empire, the swedish Caroleans, the strongest army in the world pound for pound, ALL had one at hand in every battle, be their other weapons pike or gun.
They were used in every battle, and to be accepted into the army had to be sharp enough to cut a feather mid flight, and strong enough(Springy steel to the rescue) to not break or be permanently damaged by the weight of a grown man stepping on in and trying to break it with weight and applied force(Something no katana or saber could have replicated).
Mayhaps not as sharp, but you dont need to be sharp enough to cut steel to kill a man.
And this, is a short overview of the difference between eastern and western blades.
Hope you someday might find it usefull for your writing. If not, i still hope you found it fun to learn.
I always love hearing about physics and tactics in action, and this definitely applies!
Both actually fuel a lot of my own action writing, as I find the tactical back-and-forth of anything from a single brawl to an entire war to the most interesting aspect of the conflict. It's the "problem/solution set" (as I like to call it) that makes such a thing feel more like storytelling than sportcasting. And finding ways to incorporate physics is always fun, as it helps increase the plausibility and can even make for some cool surprises.
Thanks for sharing!
Chapter 14: To the Rescue
Gustave comes to seek the only one able to help him.
Morher what is your opinion on Ty Lee calling Azula “Princess”
Just in general, perhaps as a little cute thing that just so happens to extend into the bedroom sometimes 🤭
Atp im turning everyone in vampires
ACTUALLY VAMP TYLEE WAS IN MY QUEUE FOR A LONG TIME cus someone asked me what my thoughts were on vamp tylee and now i cant find the question 😭 im very sorry for such delay tumblr user
This azula been sitting there since november lmao forgor to post
Thought itd suit her perfectly… and it does 🥴
https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2026/05/15/Alberta-Separatists-Ignored-Power-Treaties/
Ottawa, like the secessionists, aims to extract maximum resources. First Nations have enduring rights.
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
i was talking about this on my server earlier but i really think "cozy" is one of the worst genre labels out there in the gaming space. like people dunk on the terms "metroidvania" and "first person shooter" a lot for being uncreative or limiting but at least those are like... falsifiable descriptors. you can look at a game and go "yeah this game's mechanics and core gameplay loop generally operate like metroid/castlevania" or "yeah this game primarily uses a first person camera paired with some sort of projectile weapon" so i don't think they're completely useless. but "cozy" is just nonsense. fully subjective. i see a lot of games popularly labeled as "cozy" that share almost zero mechanical features between them and don't even always match in tone or aesthetic. hearing a game described as "cozy" doesn't tell you anything about what to expect as a player beyond maybe giving you a sort of forewarning about the fanbase and their discomfort tolerance. "cozy" is not a quantifiable metric. like imagine if someone offered to buy you takeout and asked you what kind of food you'd like and you told them fully unironically, and with no further elaboration, "i want to get yummy food." that's what hearing "cozy games" sounds like to me
wish literary magazines would realise that 'we don't send rejection notes because if you submit a story to us we'll hold it under consideration forever' is uh. a really bad policy from a writer perspective.
like ok this is changing over time but the traditional industry norm is 'no simultaneous submissions' ie once you've submitted a piece to a magazine for consideration you mustn't send it anywhere else until they get back to you. ergo, 'if you submit to us your piece will be under consideration indefinitely' means 'you cannot submit this piece to any non-simsub friendly market until our magazine goes out of business'. give me my story back ):<
I cannot believe it worked
my emo son