summer sufferers poll: would you rather have…
the ability to repel all bugs so they can’t touch/bite/sting you
the ability to always be at a comfortable temperature while outside
no chafing ever again
Sade Olutola

Product Placement

Kiana Khansmith

Kaledo Art
Claire Keane

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
No title available
DEAR READER

Andulka
Cosimo Galluzzi

Discoholic 🪩

JBB: An Artblog!
cherry valley forever
ojovivo
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
we're not kids anymore.
AnasAbdin
Cosmic Funnies
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
KIROKAZE
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Sweden
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Greece

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 Singapore
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from Singapore
seen from United Kingdom
@ocean-watcher
summer sufferers poll: would you rather have…
the ability to repel all bugs so they can’t touch/bite/sting you
the ability to always be at a comfortable temperature while outside
no chafing ever again
This was posted on a ‘second hand finds’ Facebook page…
…only to be followed by this amazing message.
The roller coaster ride started.
With a happy ending…
…and a sweet poem to finish.
Google Drive Warning
Friends, in case some of you, like me, are published authors or illustrators or creators of any kind, and you are still using any Google service (Gmail, Drive, Calendar, Classroom), please consider deleting all your material from Drive and moving it to external harddisks or something similar before it turns into a catastrophic problem like mangaka Masahiro Itosugi just experienced:
Japanese adult manga creator Masahiro Itosugi had his Google account permanently banned when he uploaded old manuscripts to Drive, reignitin
I really hope this comes as no surprise to all of you and you were already taking precautions about it, but I know for a fact that 100% of my colleagues in the academic field back their papers and their books up on Drive, and that most of our institutional email addresses and some essential tools (for example Gmeet, that we are required to use for remote teaching or to record conferences) are based on Google Workspace (including crucial stuff like uni department documents, scientific journal archives, publicly funded projects contracts and so on).
Now they could be flagged for copyright infringment and lose access to their entire accounts for uploading back up copies of THEIR OWN work on Drive, because AI systems are apparently unable to recognise the legitimate owner of copyrighted material (or they have been intentionally set up to not recognise it so that tech corps can steal people's work).
The complete automation of the scraping-scanning-banning process, that Google has now delegated entirely to unchecked AI, with no human review, is coming for us quicker than I thought, and while there may be some things that I fear we can't disentangle from this mess anymore (I'm thinking of Gmail specifically), we can still pull our work from Drive before it's too late.
I'm not sure how to properly tag this, but if you know people who may need this warning, please help them understand how serious things are becoming.
Stay safe out there and fuck AI.
Important PSA. Fuck AI. The water wasting art stealing hallucination machines need to be stopped.
She got the idea for the study while walking with her advisor at Stanford to discuss her thesis topic, and the paper she eventually published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology in 2014 is sharp enough that it should have ended the seated meeting on the day it came out.
She ran 4 experiments on 176 people. Same person tested twice. Once sitting, once walking. The creativity tasks were the standard ones psychologists have used for decades to measure how good a brain is at generating novel useful ideas.
81% of participants in the first experiment produced more creative ideas while walking than while sitting. In the second experiment, 88%. In the third, 100%. Every single person walked into a more creative version of themselves. On average, people generated 60% more novel useful ideas the moment their legs started moving.
The skeptical question is the obvious one. Maybe it was the fresh air. Maybe it was the scenery passing by. Maybe it was the change of environment doing the work, not the walking itself.
Oppezzo killed every one of those explanations with one experimental decision. She put people on a treadmill facing a blank wall. No scenery. No fresh air. No environmental change. Just legs moving in place while staring at white drywall. The 60% boost held.
Then she ran the experiment that closed the case completely. She took participants outside in two conditions. Half of them walked through a Stanford courtyard. The other half were pushed through the exact same courtyard in a wheelchair. Same outdoor stimulation. Same scenery passing at the same speed. The only difference was whether the legs were moving.
The walkers produced dramatically more novel high-quality ideas than the wheelchair group. The outdoors did almost nothing on its own. The walking did everything.
She also tested the opposite kind of thinking. Convergent thinking. The kind where there is one right answer and you have to narrow down to it. Word puzzles where 3 words share a hidden fourth word that connects them. The seated participants did slightly better on these. Walkers got slightly worse.
Walking is not a general intelligence enhancer. It does one specific thing. It opens up the divergent search inside your brain. The part that generates options. The part that produces unexpected connections. The part that takes a problem and finds five ways into it instead of one.
When you need to converge on the single right answer, sit down. When you need to find the answer in the first place, get up.
The mechanism is now well understood. Walking selectively activates what neuroscientists call the default mode network, the system inside your brain that runs when you are not consciously focused on anything. The DMN is where mind-wandering happens. Where memories cross-reference each other. Where ideas that have been sitting in separate folders inside your head finally bump into each other.
When you sit at a desk and force yourself to concentrate, you suppress the DMN. When you walk at a natural pace, the executive part of your brain gets just busy enough handling the walking that the DMN comes online and starts doing the work that focus was blocking.
The most useful finding in the entire paper is the one almost nobody quotes. The boost did not turn off the moment people stopped walking. Participants who walked first and then sat back down stayed elevated. Their next round of seated creativity work was still significantly better than people who had been sitting the whole time. The rest lingered for at least several minutes after the legs stopped moving.
You do not need to do creative work while walking. You need to walk before the creative work. The brain holds the state.
Edited down a long tweet. (x)
hbo max blocks screenshots even when I use the snipping tool AND firefox AND ublock which is a fucking first. i will never understand streaming services blocking the ability to take screenshots thats literally free advertising for your show right there. HOW THE HELL IS SOMEBODY GONNA PIRATE YOUR SHOW THROUGH SCREENSHOTS. JACKASS
somewhere out there is a guy who meticulously takes screenshots of every individual frame of his favorite tv shows and then painstakingly etches each one onto a roll of film which he puts into his old timey projector and recreates the footage as a silent film with his own lavishly hand-lettered dialogue cards and original score that he plays on his upright piano and charges audiences one shiny penny a play. at last, big media has finally outsmarted ol' Zachary Zoetrope
PSA for everyone who doesn't know, explained simply
this is NOT because of blocking screenshots, it's because of HOW streaming sites use your computer's hardware to optimise performance, which means the thing rendering the video and the thing capturing your screen aren't the SAME thing. so they can't talk together.
you can fix this by going to your browser settings, searching for "hardware acceleration", and turning that off.
This also fixes screen sharing to other screens. It has been GODSEND
type this in the toolbar to find this setting in firefox: about:preferences#searchResults
Reblog to hug prev poster (they need a hug)
I know i've said it before, but if you are concerned it could be real and not a scam, the best way to avoid getting scammed is to return contact separately.
Here's how that works:
say you get a text from your internet provider, let's say it's Comcast (whom i hate). So you have this text that says it's from Comcast about your bill with a contact number and a clickable link -- could be real, could be a scam.
Don't touch anything about this text. Open a web browser and look up the customer service number for Comcast. Or get the number from the bill they send you. However you do it, get the contact info for Comcast from a trusted source, like an official phone directory or the Comcast website itself.
Get in touch with them using that information.
So. Let's run the example both ways it could go.
If it IS a scam: you reach out to Comcast and tell them you were contacted about a problem with your bill, they look you up in their customer database, and they tell you there is no problem with your bill.
If it's NOT a scam, you do the same thing, they look you up, and they explain the problem. In this case, neither Comcast nor the employees involved give a single shit whether or not you clicked the link in the text vs. going through their official website.
This works the same for the your bank, the IRS, Amazon, political causes, charities, everything.
By handling any questionable incoming calls to action this way, you significantly protect yourself from scams and malware and shit
You can do this with phone calls too!!! If a company calls you asking for some info or about a problem with you card/account/whatever you can ask them for a reference number for your case and call back later. You don't have to give a reason but if you feel awkward you can just say you have a meeting in 2 minutes but can call back another time to deal with it.
If it's not scam they'll be like sure, here's the reference number. Then you follow the instructions above, call the separate number you find yourself on a reputable website and give that person the reference number. And they'll help you resolve the issue.
Don't let scammers scare you over the phone into giving them sensitive information!!!!
great addition ^^^
If you check for the contact information online:
Do NOT use the website previews/AI answers on google or any other search engine. AI is often wrong and scammers have managed to get their own numbers in the previews.
Make sure that the website is correct. Look for any errors in the URL (phishing sites often use double letters, replacement letters [like I/i instead of a lowercase l], or a different TLD like .li instead of .com) and inconsistencies on the site. These scams are getting more advanced and harder to recognize, so if you're unsure, do NOT log in or use any of the contact information available. There are a variety of tools online that can check site URLs to see if they're legit.
And remember: You are not too smart to be scammed.
Reblog to cast heal on prev
They keep trying to make trek for modern sensibilities but they’re just making tos look excessively slutty
Exhibit A
I liked these tags but I had something to say about it
I already assumed that the dresses were a choice made by the female crew, mostly for my own sanity. They do show (very infrequently) women in tos wearing pants
And they show men wearing dresses in tng, but only ever in the background (unless you count the dress uniforms)
And obviously I like that these were included, but they were clearly a cop out decision.
“Yeah see men can wear dresses, women can wear pants. They just don’t choose to” reads as “of course I’m not sexist, women just like wearing tiny little dresses in the future”
And thinking about it from a late sixties perspective, many women did see more revealing clothes as an empowering choice to make. Men wanted women covered and modest, understated makeup, only exposed or done up for male enjoyment. Some women took that in the opposite direction and chose to wear more extravagant makeup, revealing clothing, and brighter colors. It was a progressive time, and some of the choices made in an attempt to highlight that in the show did not age well.
But at the same time, you can clearly see that some of these “progressive” points were only added in as a write off.
And thinking about it from a late sixties perspective, many women did see more revealing clothes as an empowering choice to make. Men wanted women covered and modest, understated makeup, only exposed or done up for male enjoyment. Some women took that in the opposite direction and chose to wear more extravagant makeup, revealing clothing, and brighter colors.
I think it's worth emphasizing that this very genuinely is the main reason for the "sexist" miniskirts. IRL, women were often not choosing between sexy miniskirts and non-objectifying pants, but long skirts (respectable) and short skirts (rebellious). Deliberately wearing short skirts as rebellion against patriarchal control that mandated long skirts or maaaaybe loose slacks on a good day is still hardly unknown among girls/women leaving conservative communities in the USA, and was only more commonly coded that way at the time.
Sally Kellerman, the actress for Elizabeth Dehner, found the close fit of the supposedly more feminist pants uncomfortable and is often given something to hold in front of her because she was so intensely self-conscious about them. Grace Lee Whitney (Janice Rand) loathed the more "proper" initial look and worked with the (gay) costume designer, William Ware Theiss, to design a different, more daring and cool-looking aesthetic for women of the future that appealed to her personally. That was what resulted in the miniskirt uniform design. No doubt it served the objectifying tastes of various straight men involved, but literally zero of them were responsible for the design of Whitney's and Nichols's uniforms.
Not only did Nichelle Nichols not consider herself suffering from the miniskirt, she admitted later to sometimes deliberately lifting the skirt even higher at Uhura's station to show off more of her legs because she hadn't worked so hard on her body to not show them off. Meanwhile, Jill Ireland, the actress for Leila Kalomi, was nervous that she might have to wear the kinds of revealing costumes so many other TOS actresses did, and Theiss instead designed her the comfortable overalls she wears as Leila in "This Side of Paradise."
The kneejerk backlash against short skirts (in decidedly more reactionary eras of both Star Trek and US culture) led to both the large-scale disappearance of the skirts and the snide commentary on them throughout later iterations of Trek, with zero consideration of the fact that they were designed by a gay man to suit the preferences of the leading actresses at a time when they commonly represented rebellion. The Berman-era Star Trek productions tut-tutting at the old costumes while actually putting actresses in uncomfortable, form-fitting uniforms they disliked is ... uh, something else.
Even while the female Starfleet costumes shifted towards pants (and militarism) in the movies, btw, Nichelle Nichols insisted on getting to wear skirts as Uhura—because she liked them and she had little patience for 80s respectability.
According to early lore (Making of Star Trek?) Nichelle sat at her station between takes hemming her skirt shorter. So she's said. But we all wore short skirts then.
like to charge, reblog to cast.
Please go learn how time works.
absolutely hate it when the pleasurable activity procrastination hits. i’m going to do something fun that brings me joy but not yet. yeah, not yet. not yet. maybe i shouldn’t do it at all, it’s not that fun
How refreshing and comforting to have friends older than you and how delightful and inspiring to have friends younger than you
Reblog to hug prev
Please
Love that Murderbot sees itself as the absolute worst most dangerous thing in any room at any given time
Except ☝️when a combat SecUnit or combat bot shows up
Then it's a very sudden turn to "I am a mid sized herding breed and that is a fucking wolf. All my sheep and myself are going to die"
i need data for a statistics project for school, so be my sample data, worms. i need thirty people minimum so if there aren't enough voters yet i'd love if you could help. thank you very much. worms.
take this test (https://www.keithcirkel.co.uk/whats-my-jnd/), then come back here:
what's your JND?
.00030-.00099
.0010-.0017
.0017-.0024
.0024-.0031
.0031-.0038
.0038-.0045
.0045-.0052
.0052-.0059
.0059-.0066
.0066-.0073
.0073-.0080
.0080 or greater
it doesnt have to be a good score, you dont have to take it multiple times, you dont have to get on a good screen, etcetera. just gimme your score please this is my final project grade :)
i'd love if you could reblog for reach
I am tired of this! Or am I just tired?