the way they did not play around with these posters
YOU ARE THE REASON
Sade Olutola
macklin celebrini has autism
cherry valley forever
ojovivo
Jules of Nature
RMH
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
Sweet Seals For You, Always
todays bird

JVL

Janaina Medeiros
h
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
Game of Thrones Daily

titsay
art blog(derogatory)

izzy's playlists!

Origami Around
Fai_Ryy

seen from Portugal

seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from United States

seen from Saudi Arabia

seen from Malaysia
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Chile

seen from Brazil
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
@nigellalawless
the way they did not play around with these posters
being sad and horny is a privilege
hope is a skill
hope is a weapon you are trained to wield
favourite additions
You cannot hide this in the tags, bestie. This is too lovely to keep a secret.
8/27/2023
Marjane Satrapi, Persepolis
come. and be my baby. by maya angelou
"Tale of Moonlight” (1968)
Director: Iryna Hurvych
@glitchgeek
oh my gosh. how enchanting! thank you 💚💚
somebody posted this Calvin and Hobbes strip and i cannot overstate just how topical this fuckin thing is
Criterion Collection has announced they will be launching a channel on TikTok to reach a new audience with their preservation of classic films. Launching today, Criterion has posted My Dinner with André (1981) as it’s first upload.
'Borrowing the Tiger's Majesty' by Yuzu Kato
Things worn down by people.
Black Beauty 1877, Natalia Kleszczewska, 2024
dark half of the year initiated
bright half of the year initiated
WITHNAIL AND I (1987) dir. Bruce Robinson
“I feel it in my work as a teacher, where I recognize that we are so close — so, so close — to a world where teaching looks like AI-generating lesson plans and delivering those lesson plans using AI-generated slides, and then assessing the skills of those lessons using AI-generated tests, and then grading those tests using a form of AI. The content of AI producing student work that is then fed back to AI for AI to assess. And for what? And at what cost? It pains me. It pains me deeply. And then I sit down and I read about clams. And it’s not just that I am reading about clams. It’s that I am reading the perspective of someone who thought that it was worth paying attention to clams. There. Remind me again why we read? I think that’s part of it. You pick up a book and someone has you by the arm. There, they are saying, look over there. They are pointing now. They are holding something in their hand. Little clam in the palm, refusing to open. Look at that thing that loves being alive, how it resists the same sun we turn our cheek towards. Crazy world, beautiful place. Down in the deep somewhere, a clam smaller than my hand is withstanding the pressure of a few dozen full-size trains just hanging out on top of its body.”
— Mary Oliver’s “Clam” - by Devin Kelly
Imagine you had to meet someone in New York City. You couldn’t communicate with them in advance; you only knew that you had to meet them somewhere in the city at some point on a particular day. Where and when would you choose to go, in order to maximize the chances of meeting them?
The economist and game theorist Thomas Schelling posed this question to students. The most common answer given by them was to meet at 12pm by the information desk at Grand Central station. It’s not that 12pm is a particularly useful time to meet, or that Grand Central station is a particularly useful place – you could easily rattle off a list of a hundred other places that are equally suitable. But in trying to pick a point, you’re trying to guess what other people might pick. 12pm feels like a particularly salient time, and Grand Central station feels like a particularly salient place to meet people. It feels like what other people will pick, and so it’s what you should pick.
[...]
These focal points, points around which people can organize and coordinate even without communicating with one another, are called Schelling points after Thomas Schelling. They’re a great example of how human beings can coordinate their actions even without communication, as a result of the mental models they have about other people’s behavior.
Schelling points are a useful tool for thinking about organizations. They help us to think about what people do, and where they go, in the absence of communication.
Imagine you’re working in a professional services business with lots of clients. You want to know what the latest developments are on a particular project. Where do you go? Clearly, you could solve this problem with communication. You’re not in the artificial environment of an academic experiment; you can just go and ask the person who’s leading the project, and they’ll give you an update. But that’s slow, and interrupts them, and means you need to wait on a reply. It also scales very poorly – what if that person is getting ten people asking them for updates every day? Coordination that requires communication is costly, and so it’s still worth exploring solutions that don’t involve communication.
If you have a system that everyone uses, and that provides an obvious and salient summary of projects, then that will become the place people working on projects will post their updates, and it will become the place people wanting to check on those projects will go to check on them. People will use it without having to communicate with one another. You will have created a Schelling point, a way for people to coordinate without communicating.
A big shared drive full of random documents tends to lack Schelling points; a more structured knowledge base is more likely to grow them. A clearly structured and easy-to-navigate website will develop popular Schelling points; a jumbled-up one won’t. Schelling points can be deliberately designed, can be consciously built into tools, and can be strengthened by the consistent use of those tools.
Ultimately, though, Schelling points are effective because of social norms. I know what’s salient to me, and I know what’s salient to you; we share an understanding of the world, and that allows us to converge on something without communication. Nobody designed Grand Central station as a Schelling point; it just is one, as a result of an unknowable emergent process within our collective psyche.
Schelling points, then, are enormously powerful. They allow for people to coordinate without communicating, even in enormously large organizations. They can be designed thoughtfully into processes to make them more effective.
But there’s a danger to them, too. Schelling points can be accidental as well as designed, and they’re also self-strengthening: the more people coordinate around a single point, the more plausible that point is as a choice, and so the more people will coordinate around it, and so on. Schelling points emerge whether we like it or not, and can prove stubbornly hard to displace. We are as much the prisoners of them as we are the designers of them; we’ll likely still be meeting people in Grand Central station for many years to come.
—Coordination without communication: What arranging a meeting in Grand Central station can teach us about organizations
❄❄...Some snowy footage from the past few incredible days in The Netherlands...❄❄ Video: goose_bouma
165 school girls + their teachers buried in Minab, Iran