macklin celebrini has autism
RMH
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
Show & Tell
taylor price
oozey mess
Claire Keane
tumblr dot com
hello vonnie
Jimmy Eat World
Sweet Seals For You, Always
izzy's playlists!
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
bliss lane
❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
The Stonewall Inn
Keni
No title available
No title available
seen from United States
seen from Azerbaijan
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Switzerland
seen from Russia
seen from Argentina
seen from Vietnam
seen from United States
seen from Pakistan
seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Argentina
seen from India
seen from Türkiye
seen from Nigeria
@russulanongrata
my main is Russula-nongrata and it seems like it is glitched to the point I can’t use it with no response to my support request on that so I made this to use as a side blog. Now I have given up and made a new main blog, https://FungiDaughter.tumblr.com
Just so everyone is aware:
An international group of qualified mushroom identifiers who do worldwide identification in emergency cases have identified the Shroomers App as a potentially very dangerous system that could kill you if you try to use it to identify edible mushrooms. They use AI to generate almost all of their content, including their identification profiles on their app as well as their books and other materials. Not only is this unethical from a content creation standpoint, it is also extremely dangerous.
DO NOT USE APPS FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES BEYOND SIMPLE CURIOSITY. A MISTAKE WHEN IDENTIFYING AN EDIBLE COULD COST YOU YOUR LIFE. DO NOT EAT ANY FORAGED MUSHROOM YOU CANNOT IDENTIFY YOURSELF BY SIGHT OR HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED IN PERSON BY SOMEONE WHO CAN.
ONLY BUY BOOKS FROM REPUTABLE SOURCES AND AT THIS POINT THAT MEANS ASKING EXPERIENCED PEOPLE WHAT BOOKS THEY USE.
Mushrooms are fun, amazing organisms. Enjoy safely.
learn foraging IRL- even if you're in a major urban area, I can almost guarantee there are people who know and are willing to teach you.
do not EVER eat foraged plants or ESPECIALLY fungi unless you are completely sure. read ecology books, botany books, and mycology books. learn lookalikes.
even if you Do think you know what a mushroom is, do clarifying experiments- look at bruising, the patterns under the cap, literally anything identifying. do the same with plants- how are the leaves arranged, what do the edges look like, where is it growing, etc?
I'm an experienced forager and I still have to double check stuff. do not rely on apps. they can give you an idea of where to start researching what species it is, but do not ever trust them. if it says it's an oyster mushroom, don't assume it is one- use it as a jumping off point to see if it actually is an oyster mushroom (it's probs not), and to learn about species that look like it. do not ever trust an app, AI or not, over the knowledge in books and in the heads of foragers, or your own experience. I've had the Seek app (not AI afaik) tell me shit is edible when it's clearly a Destroying Angel.
The Seek and iNaturalist app, and I could be wrong, do use a basic identification algorithm, and I'm not sure if it's considered AI or not, but it's more of a sorting algorithm more than anything else, and it's mostly based on human inputs and identifications. I'm not entirely sure the distinction. But as someone who uses iNaturalist regularly as a member of the Fungal Diversity Project, I will say if you're hoping for identification, go with iNaturalist rather than Seek. And never use either for identifying if something is edible or not. The beauty of iNaturalist is you can A) sort through tons of verified observations to help narrow down your own identification by comparison, and B) the iNat community as a whole can help you identify something, at least as far you can identify something through a photograph and basic descriptions. Sometimes it takes a while, but usually people can help you verify within a couple months. Plants and animals tend to be quicker, mushrooms take longer.
Seek is less serious and really an App more designed for hobbyists and casual observers. I would also like to correct you on one thing as someone who has used both apps extensively. The Seek app absolutely didn't tell you something was EDIBLE. It may have misidentified your mushroom as something you knew to be edible, but iNat and Seek don't venture into edibility talk (because as we've seen with other apps, hence my whole post, irresponsible). They do however sometimes link to other sites or resources where edibility may be a detail discussed along with other pertinent information, but they themselves don't have edibility information, and I think that's an extremely important distinction here.
Either way, never rely on an app, or even a single resource for edibility info. Read reputable books, join mushrooming clubs, take classes, etc. And NEVER eat something foraged you cannot personally identify. The one exception to this rule is if it has been identified by an expert or experienced forager.
good addition!!!! to clarify, I meant seek identified smth as an edible species when it was destroying angel- it thankfully doesn't say edible/inedible but yeah, does link to stuff calling species edible. I mostly use Seek as a means of recording info on what species might be about as someone who lives in a unique, old growth forest- def do not use it as an app for foraging. I bring that up bc I've had apps try to claim smth is an edible species when it's not, and I'd probably have eaten it if I didn't know about foraging and had just googled it. I v v much discourage app usage as anything but maybe narrowing down what it could be, and, even then, do not eat it unless you're sure. it sucks, but I don't think ppl should forage unless they have an experienced forager w them, even w reliable books.
tbh, I do want to learn more on how to forage beyond learning from someone IRL, but idk if books can cut it. I learned what I know from family and other ppl IRL and idk if I'd trust a book, let alone an app. they can be okay for giving you an idea of what it could be but, generally, it's nothing compared to someone in person who's familiar w the area
I agree with all of the above. Putting in my own thoughts — I typically tell people engaging well with iNaturalist is like a book. It’s a great resource but you really do get out what you put in. Which varies by experience going in and attention/time put toward it.
It can be easy to screw up majorly referencing even the best quality guidebook if you just glance at it, or have some fundamental misunderstanding, or hit the 1 major error in an otherwise good source and don’t reference anything else, much diminishing your chance of catching an error or misleading but technically correct stumbling block.
Therefore I say for something new, 3 or more different quality sources (well-referenced guidebooks or sites) that aren’t just copying each other if you want to ID for non-ingestion (eg like for dyes), at least 5 if you are a beginner and want to ID to ingest. And even then of course we all cringe and say go to a club! Ask an experienced friend! But there’s always someone starting out without those things, so in their absence, at least close reference of ~5+ quality sources.
And for iNat engaging with it fully makes it count as one quality source . Fully to me is:
Check what the computer ID says, note everything listed not just the top one
Post your observation with a genus from one of those IDs or a higher taxa (ex: Russulaceae), see what people say,
in the meantime look through a number of potentials
Refer to the maps of observations,
And the “similar species” tab (available on desktop version of the site),
Check out that taxonomy tab and click through to explore your best guess(es)’s near relatives
Just taking a glance at the computer ID or the first suggestion by someone else just working off a picture? No. That’s something but not book or 1:1 expert counsel equivalent.
But!! If you put a lot into it iNat can for sure be a book equivalent to me. Or at least a strong support (though you do have to go elsewhere for keys and descriptions — unless you count how iNat users post their own keys in journals/guides on the site sometimes)
Same for Mushroom Observer and certain well-managed identification Facebook groups
Catherine Hyde
December's Cinnamon Breath.
her website
So real that the relatively hard part of producing your own food are the harvest, processing, storage, distribution and use steps. Whether agriculture or forage, managing abundance, as she says, requires the most learning.
Mycology side note the fungi shown on screen are Suillus species, probably Suillus americanus specifically. Colloquially they are included in what people call boletes (all soft-pored cap and stem mushrooms)
lol it really is clear what my favorite painting genre is from that list, even if I don’t like ranking favorites & genres are fuzzy categories
I am once again reminded of how infuriating the Toyen Wikipedia page is. And how people strip her out of being female (a woman) for having been alienated by the experience
It’s so interesting how they do that to her — a very gnc woman — and not to Georgia O’Keefe, who said outright she didn’t want to be called a woman painter or woman artist, just painter or artist.
What’s the difference?
Oh Georgia kept long hair and a name ending in an “a”. That’s what being a woman is, sure 🙄
Toyen - Wikipedia
Screaming because she is they/themed the whole way through
Screaming because she has a “lovingly” detailed speculation on her gender identity section but NO gallery of her works
If I fix it I’ll have to do it under an IP edit from a place other than where I edit under my actual account. Because that account is under my actual identity.
I would aim to be comprehensive and fair — I would leave the speculation but add in more dissent if I can find good sources
And most of all actually focus on her paintings and show pictures of them for fucks sake.
Any help is of course appreciated.
It’s so funny I just noticed she’s still called a “draughtswoman” even as she gets they/themed otherwise
Perhaps changing this will be easier than I thought. I kind of doubt now that the editor(s) who did the (partial) de-womaning of her are paying much attention to this one
8 off the top of my head globally notable female painters:
1. Remedios Varo
2. Leonora Carrington
3. Frida Kahlo
4. Artemesia Gentilischi Gentileschi spelling was off at 1st)
5. Hilma af Klint
6. Toyen
7. Georgia O’Keefe
8. Beatrix Potter
8 off the top of my head globally notable female painters:
1. Remedios Varo
2. Leonora Carrington
3. Frida Kahlo
4. Artemesia Gentilischi Gentileschi spelling was off at 1st)
5. Hilma af Klint
6. Toyen
7. Georgia O’Keefe
8. Beatrix Potter
Women! How many female painters can you name off the top of your head?
1-3
4-6
7-9
10+
I have no interest in painting
Results
For obvious reasons no listing painters in the tags 👁️
So the number changes depending on how strict the criteria are.
If it has to be globally notable female painters, on the scale of “already has a Wikipedia page even before I made her one” level notable, 8
If I can include what I consider local notable female painters, add 6
If I can include female painters in my short term memory I am not sure I would remember long term or not because I learned their names recently, add 2
If I could add female painters known from my personal life who don’t have to be notable… ok that feels like cheating but I could name 5 of those so add 5
And of course this would be cheating but if I could look at a list of notable female painters and pick all the ones I recognize and can name 1 work of by title or description, I could get dozens and dozens more. I haven’t done that.
I voted 10+ though including my core 8 plus the 6 local notable painters plus the 2 short term memory names.
They are both botanical illustrators.
In my next post I am going to name the 8.
