@munnchausenzip i can't lie, it goes hard (x) (x)
d e v o n

bliss lane
Sade Olutola
hello vonnie

blake kathryn
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Keni

izzy's playlists!
Fai_Ryy
Cookie Run:Kingdom Official!

No title available
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
occasionally subtle
Sweet Seals For You, Always

ellievsbear

gracie abrams
Cosimo Galluzzi

Jimmy Eat World

Love Begins

PR's Tumblrdome
seen from Spain

seen from Colombia
seen from Ukraine
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Iraq

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Germany

seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from T1

seen from United States

seen from Indonesia
seen from United States

seen from Egypt

seen from Malaysia
seen from Brazil
@schlumpfdiwumpf
@munnchausenzip i can't lie, it goes hard (x) (x)
#let me be for real for a moment some of the reasons kanji have so many readings are #they entered the Japanese language as loanwords multiple times at different times of history #so different Chinese pronunciations = different kanji reading #as Chinese pronunciation changed plus a lot of loanwoards entered Japanese as specialised language #some of the readings are kind of euphonic changes depending on what the kanji is attached to (sh sounds vs j sounds vs z sounds a big one) #and some are the old Japanese word that was attached to a kanji with the same meaning = nama #which is also why there are so many homophones since Chinese is a tonal language and Japanese isn't @pudentilla
OHHHH IT'S ONYOMI VS KUNYOMI TIME!! Okay sorry for the caps but this is a subject I actually think is really cool.
So the official term for this, when a kanji is read one way in some contexts and a different way in others, is usually a case of onyomi vs kunyomi. -yomi, "reading" (from yomu "to read") basically categorizes words into whether you read them with the chinese pronunciation or the japanese pronunciation.
There are a lot of complicated factors that go into this but the easiest way for english speakers to wrap their heads around it is that the Japanese language ended up with multiple sets of vocabulary in the same way that the English language did with the Germanic language/Romance language split; you have one set of vocabulary for common, everyday use that derives from germanic vocab, and then another set of vocabulary for fancy, formal use that derives from Latinate vocab. The classic example is using swine to describe the animal, which the Germanic-speaking Anglo-Saxon farmers and handlers would tend to, and porc to describe the meat, which the French-speaking Normans would eat. But pretty much every word in the English language has some degree of casual-formal duplication of this kind.
Much like European scholars did with Latin, a bunch of vocabulary got imported by the literati of Japan starting around about the 5th century in order to have a different and more formal register to talk about certain topics. This was imported alongside the Chinese writing system at the same time, which then over the next few centuries was shifted into a simpler, non-logographic, syllabic script that became hiragana (the wavy one.)
But that means that a bunch of imported Chinese vocabulary was conventionally written in their original-or-close-to-it hanzi form, and spoken with their original-or-close-to-it Chinese pronunciation. Words of this type have a much higher incidence of long vowels, left over from the Chinese where each character would represent a single complex syllable varied by vowel intonation, compared to native Japanese words which are polysyllabic and hit more consonants.
So, the system has evolved in various directions over time, and now there are a lot of ways that a single character can be read depending on positioning and context, but the broad strokes are: if the kanji is mostly on its own, surrounded by hiragana, it will take the Japanese reading (kunyomi) and if it's part of a compound word, paired with other kanji, it will take the Chinese reading (onyomi.) The more formal the text -- especially notable with medical, scientific, or governmental texts -- the more dense and compacted it will get, with a much higher ratio of kanji compounds to hiragana, and a correspondingly higher dose of onyomi readings.
To leave off with one example: the video above highlights (手), which is 'hand.' When it appears by itself surrounded by simple words like participles, it takes the kunyomi te, like in the sentence 'take my hand' (手を握って, te o nigitte.) But if you are using it as part of a more abstraction concept, like in 手動 -- done by hand, or manual, see how the english term underwent the exact same shift into latinate when it gains a level of abstraction? -- then it becomes part of a compound word with another kanji. Now it takes the onyomi shu, to become part of the compound word shudou. Catch that long vowel! If it weren't part of a compound word, that 動 by itself would take the kunyomi hataraki, for motion or action.
Anyway, onyomi and kunyomi, fun!
Some more examples in English:
'Troupe', 'troop', and 'thorp'. Loaned from French twice, as well as the homegrown term for a small village/group of houses.
'Pack', and 'bailey'. Native word and French loan.
"Sir', 'sire', 'seigneur' and 'Monsieur'. All from French at slightly different times and in different contexts.
Same with 'dame', 'dam', 'madam', and 'ma'am'.
'Mister', 'master', 'magister' and 'maître d'. All from Latin and French.
To 'spout' and 'spit'. First is from Dutch, second is native English.
To 'wake', 'watch' and 'wait'. First two are native English, third is from French.
To 'ward' versus 'guard'. Same word, but the second one was borrowed into Latin and then back into English from French.
In English the connections are disguised by using different characters for each word, but it's the same process!
i'm a big fan of how the adjectives 'chivalrous' and 'cavalier' are roughly opposite descriptors of a person's attitude and manners but are literally the same word ('rides a horse') borrowed in twice separately, and evolved along different routes.
('cavalier' achieved its negative connotation largely by getting attached to a specific political faction in a time of civil war, while 'chivalrous' was associated with poetry about idealized, hypothetical knights.)
guess who
come on. don’t just stand there. didn’t you miss me?
he’s letting me go
where are you going?
my love, did he tell you? we can be happy again. i’m coming home with you
my love
why won’t you look at me?
can you hear me? i’m right here
just turn around
please
he said i could go back. he said i could go with you
you can’t hear me, can you?
you don’t even know i’m here. i’m right behind you
wait!!! please wait
i need to think about this
stop!
won’t you stop walking please
this is some cruel trick, isn’t it?
just some. some specter dreamt up to torture me
my husband would never leave me behind so easily
you’re not him. i know you’re not
maybe it’s not a trick. maybe you really have forgotten me
please. please my love can you hear me
orpheus
look at me i beg you. what’s going on what’s happening
why won’t you turn around
please it’s been ages i thought i’d never see you again won’t you hold me for a moment
stop
orpheus
i can’t do this i can’t go with you
not if it’s going to be like this
i can’t haunt you. i need you to know i’m here i need you to love me back
don’t go please don’t
i can’t follow you out
i’m scared
wait!! please wait for me
orphe—
so somethings always bugged me and this post really brought it to bear. am i missing something critical about the orpheus thing? like he couldnt look but why didnt he just shout over his shoulder. was eurydice mute or he was deafened to her? I cant recall either of those things ever being mentioned. What was preventing them from just talking while they left?
here’s the thing about orpheus: he’s not being tested against temptation. he’s being tested in his faith. because it’s not that orpheus wasn’t allowed to see eurydice—it’s that he wasn’t allowed to know if she was even there.
here’s another thing about orpheus: he actually did it. he made it out of the underworld without turning around. but he was so excited at the possibility of getting eurydice back that he forgot she still had to follow him out. she had not yet crossed the threshold. one more second and he might’ve gotten her back.
here’s the thing about eurydice: she knew orpheus better than anyone. she knew he was not going to make it. but she followed him the whole way, because she missed him.
here’s another thing about eurydice:
Feizhi/コウラン from Golden Sun💜
One of my favorite data transfer based bonus scenes in Golden Sun TLA was when she showed up in Champa, having traveled all the way there to find Isaac, so she can give her self-made good luck charm to him!💜
Lucky Isaac…🤭
Bluesky | Instagram | Patreon | Twitch | Youtube
I'm sorry, but romance peaked when Lemony Snicket told Beatrice:
"I will love you if I never see you again"
"And I will love you if I see you every Tuesday"
"I will love you as the iceberg loves the ship"
"And as the passengers love the lifeboat"
"And as the battlefield loves young men"
"As peppermints love your allergies"
"I will love you as you grow older, which just happened and happened again and will continue to happen"
"And I will love you until every fire has been extinguished"
"And every home rebuilt"
"And every code and heart has been broken"
"And I will love you if you marry someone else"
"I will love you if you have a child, or two children, or three seems like a good number"
"I love you, Beatrice"
"I always will"
Languages tend to peak at their word for butterfly. Never seen 2 that are the same, either. Papillon. Mariposa. Borboleta. Fluture. Vlinder. Schmetterling. Pillangó. Babochka. Farfalla. Sommerfugl. Perhonen. Farasha. Titali. Chōchō. Nabi. Húdié. Buom buom. Great job guys, i really mean it.
I think we should figure out what age we’re living in now so we can say how it’s collapsing to each other
Our age of plastics is collapsing
Our age of information is collapsing! *remembers generative AI, nods to self* our age of information is collapsing.
never forget the universal rule of the order of things: People Will Not Read It
signs at stores? émail? menu ?? instruction ? post online ? caption with andswer to question ? group hand outs ??? street sign ??? no. The Written Word Is The Enemy
#The number of compliments i have gotten for reading a thing
The ability to occasionally Read A Thing will make you a hero in your workplace, especially if it is for example an error message that tells you what you need to do differently, or instructions on unjamming a printer.
how dare you say we put jam in the printer
Ok reblogging this again because story time.
I work in tech, and much of what I do is support sales reps within the company by resolving errors with the software they use.
There is one sales rep who, every single time I send her a message or email with extremely specific instructions that will resolve her issue, does something completely different from what I tell her. Every time. Without fail. It is so glaringly obvious that she has never read even a single word that I have written to her.
So one day, she sends me a message that says little more than "(software) is broken, help"
So I do my standard song and dance of asking her what she's trying to accomplish, and what specifically is stopping her from doing that. And eventually, after much unnecessary back and forth, she tells me there's an error message. I ask her to send me a screenshot of the error message. She does.
The error message basically says, "these two required fields are blank. To resolve this, please fill in these two specific fields, and then click save."
So I take a few deep breaths.
Then I lie to her.
I message her back, saying "hey yeah, for some reason it's not loading that screenshot on my end. Could you type out the full text of the error message for me?"
She does.
I ask her if she still needs help.
She does not respond.
I have similar story from tech support.
Client is reporting that Some Thing Program doesn't work. I ask if there's an error message with further information about what's not working. Client says "no". I go over and ask Client to open Some Thing. Client double-clicks on the icon for Some Thing, it starts to boot, an error message dialog flashes up on screen, Client closes error message before I can read it, Thing closes after the error.
"What did that error message say?" I ask.
"What error message?" asks Client.
I tell Client to open the Some Thing again and then not click anything else. Client opens Some Thing, error message appears, Client clicks it away again.
I tell Client to stand up, step away, and give me physical control of the computer. I open Some Thing, start looking at the error message without closing it, and Client says "You should close that." I tell Client that I am reading the error message. Client is apparently accustomed to treating error messages as a kind of spam email that should be deleted as fast as possible, and gets agitated that I'm reading it.
I read the error message. It tells me what the problem is. I fix the problem. Some Thing works now.
---
Later, I start thinking about how such an error message might perhaps be engineered to be more attention-grabbing and close-resistant as a way of making people read it. It's not important for some random program here, but there are more important systems (medical, etc) where it would be reasonable to demand the user's attention because people's lives depend on paying attention to the error message.
But then people with a perverted intellect would still be thinking about ways to avoid reading the message, like dragging it off edge of screen or hiding it behind another window. So maybe the dialog box could have an always-in-front feature to override other windows, and the alert could use the computer's hardware "beep" functionality that can't be switched off by muting the regular sound system, and keep beeping... shit, I realize I'm reinventing pain, and get philosophical about it.
Story from The Past about My Mum:
She was a computer programmer / analyst, a... Long Time Ago. Called in for a system she'd installed before, the office folk said they kept having problems where it Didn't Work Right (no error, a malfunction)
She investigated, and told them that could only happen if they did 3 specific things in a specific order, which they should not ever do.
So, she asked, did they ever do that?
No! Of course not, was the answer.
So she made a couple of small changes, packed up and said that should be fine, but they should call her if there were problems.
The next week
She had a call saying "We're getting a strange error message on the system, can you help?"
She said, of course, can they tell her the error?
And the message was:
"You Said You Didn't Do This"
watched mamma mia! (2008) for the first time today.
who is the best dad?
stellan skarsgård
pierce brosnan
colin firth
haven’t seen mamma mia
last chance to sway science on this poll
Original
"For decades, wolf researchers believed ravens followed wolf packs to find food. Every biologist who flew aerial surveys over Yellowstone saw the same thing.
Wolves moving across the snow with ravens overhead, black shapes trailing the pack like a shadow with wings. The assumption was simple. The ravens were following the wolves. The wolves would kill. The ravens would eat. A study published in March 2026 using GPS transmitters on wolves, cougars, and ravens in Yellowstone proved the assumption wrong.
The ravens were not following the wolves. They were remembering where kills had happened before and flying over those locations looking for new carcasses. The relationship between the two species is real. The mechanism is not what anyone thought it was.
Bernd Heinrich, a University of Vermont biologist who spent years studying ravens in Maine and Yellowstone, first documented the scale of the association. His data showed ravens present near wolf packs 99.7 percent of the time during winter in Yellowstone. Not occasionally. Not frequently. Essentially always. On Isle Royale, researcher John Vucetich observed the same pattern from the air.
Every wolf pack had ravens with it. The birds were just always there.
The numbers at kill sites are staggering. The average number of ravens documented at a Yellowstone wolf kill is thirty. The maximum recorded at a single carcass is 135.
A wolf pack brings down an elk in the Lamar Valley, and within hours over a hundred ravens have materialized from across the drainage to feed. They do not wait politely. They land on the carcass while the wolves are still eating. They grab chunks of meat and cache them in the snow and in tree crotches for later retrieval. Research estimates that ravens can consume up to forty percent of a carcass, which means a wolf pack that kills a seven-hundred-pound elk may lose nearly three hundred pounds of it to birds.
That loss is so significant that one study proposed a theory that reshapes how we think about wolf pack size entirely. If a pair of wolves can take down an elk, why do wolves hunt in packs of four, six, eight, or more? The per-capita meat return decreases with every additional mouth. A pair gets the most meat per wolf. The answer may be ravens. Two wolves cannot eat fast enough to outpace a hundred ravens stripping the carcass simultaneously. A larger pack can post guards, feed in shifts, and physically dominate the carcass long enough to retain a greater share of the kill. Wolves may hunt in packs not because they need more teeth to bring down prey, but because they need more bodies to defend the kill from birds.
The ravens pay for their meals. Heinrich documented in his book Mind of the Raven that ravens serve as an early warning system at kill sites. Ravens are more vigilant than wolves. They perch in trees overlooking the carcass and scan the horizon in every direction. When a grizzly bear approaches, or a rival wolf pack, or a mountain lion, the ravens see it first. Their alarm calls alert the feeding wolves to the incoming threat before the wolves' own senses detect it. The wolves get airborne sentries. The ravens get an animal with the jaw strength to open a frozen elk carcass that no raven beak can penetrate.
That is the core of the mutualism. The raven cannot open the hide. The wolf can. The wolf cannot see a threat approaching from a mile away while its head is buried in a rib cage. The raven can. Each species fills a gap in the other's capability, and the result is a partnership so consistent that L. David Mech, the most published wolf researcher in the world, wrote that each creature is rewarded in some way by the presence of the other and that each is fully aware of the other's capabilities.
The play behavior is the part that makes biologists uncomfortable because it implies something beyond transactional mutualism. Wolves and ravens play together. Not at kill sites. Not during feeding. During downtime. Yellowstone observers have documented ravens diving at resting wolves, pulling their tails, and flying away. Wolf pups chase ravens across meadows. Ravens steal sticks from pups and hold them just out of reach. The interactions look like the cross-species equivalent of two bored kids messing with each other because there is nothing else to do.
Doug Smith, the retired lead biologist of the Yellowstone Wolf Project, had watched this relationship from the air for decades. Wolf researchers have believed forever that ravens follow wolves, he wrote after the 2026 study was published. Every wolf researcher has seen it. I have seen it routinely from the plane while wolves are chasing an elk in Yellowstone Park, numerous times. Ravens are just always there. This is an age-old observation. But it has never been rigorously tested until now.
The 2026 study, which used 2.5 years of GPS data from transmitters on wolves, cougars, and ravens simultaneously, revealed that ravens were not tracking wolf movements in real time. They were patrolling known kill sites. A raven that fed at a wolf kill in a specific drainage in November would return to that drainage repeatedly over the following weeks and months, flying over the exact location where the carcass had been, checking whether a new kill had appeared. The ravens were not following the wolves. They were following the memory of where wolves had killed before.
That distinction matters because it changes the raven from a passive follower into an active strategist. A bird that follows a wolf pack is reacting. A bird that memorizes kill locations across an entire landscape and patrols them systematically is planning. The raven is not tagging along. It is running a surveillance network across hundreds of square miles of Yellowstone, checking sites where food has appeared before, and showing up fast enough when it appears again that every observer since the 1995 reintroduction assumed it had been following the wolves the whole time.
The wolf and the raven share almost identical geographic range across the Northern Hemisphere. Everywhere wolves live, ravens live. The association is not a Yellowstone novelty. It is a continental relationship between two of the most intelligent species in North American wildlife, running continuously across boreal forest, tundra, mountain, and prairie, built on meat, memory, and a mutual awareness that neither species has ever needed to be taught."
Sources: Heinrich, B. "Mind of the Raven: Investigations and Adventures with Wolf-Birds." / Stahler, D. et al. (2002). Animal Behaviour. / Mech, L.D. "The Wolf: The Ecology and Behaviour of an Endangered Species." / Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Living Bird, 2020. / Bozeman Daily Chronicle, March 2026.
My dad will listen to me talk about the same ten things that have interested me since I was 8 years old, and I am 27 now but he still thinks they're fascinating. He has like, a best-hits-of-Babylon rants, and when we're in a topic adjacent to them, he'll occasionally just invoke them. We'll be talking about the 1960's, and he'll be like, so, whatever did happen to those original Apollo rocket engines, and he knows what happened to them because I've told him about it like thirty times, and he knows that I know that he knows, but he also knows that I love talking about it and that this is a carte blanche to spend the next ten minutes spinning a yarn about the lost machining arts and the death of knowledge and the constant red-queen-hypothesis style sprint that technology is locked into just to try and preserve itself.
So I'll do the rant again, and he'll listen to it like it's his first time hearing it, and he'll ask the best questions because he's been hearing this rant for 19 years, you can bet your ass he knows the best questions, and it's... beautiful. The words are almost adjacent to the dance.
I can remember reading a book once, where there was a perfect translator. Too perfect, because it translated for meaning alone, independent of the words. A man might ask his wife, "Hey, do you remember that hotdog we shared in 1972?" and the translator would spit out "We have been many different people, but we have always loved each other. Isn't that beautiful?" And I've imagined it for those rant-dances, and tried to imagine what the words would be. I think his parts would just come out to something like "Your handful of intense interests are something that I love about you, and I want you to know that they are not merely tolerated." And my parts would come out to something like "I am sharing who I am with you because I trust you. And I've always been able to trust you. You are, and were, and remain, an amazing dad."
I'm reblogging this because this story ties into it and I want you all to read this story very much. It's from @drenamigmo and it is unbelievably good and I get a little watery every time I think about it. Also, just follow Dren in general, they're good people.
What is red queen hypothesis?
A very streamlined explanation of the red queen hypothesis is this idea in evolution biology that some animals get locked together in evolutionary traps where one animal is evolving an offensive trait as a counter to another animal, who is evolving a defensive trait at the same speed, and that both will evolve in more exaggerated forms until the traits are entirely unsustainable and both die. It comes from the red queen's race in Through the Looking Glass, where she says something about how she needs to run as fast as she possibly can just to stay in place.
If you want examples, some I've heard punted around are things like sabertooth tigers vs. megafauna and some weird ass newts in Yellowstone. The sabertooth theory is that they got locked in a race to eat megafauna that protected themselves with really thick skin, so their fangs get longer to counter the skin, then the skin got thicker to counter the fangs, repeat, and eventually, the skin became so thick that the megafauna couldn't cool themselves properly. Then humans figured out that they could just skip the giant fangs thing and just chase the megafauna until they had heat strokes. Badaboom, now the megafauna and saberteeth are both extinct. The newt example is that there are some newts in Yellowstone that have absurdly high level of tetrodotoxin in their skin. Like, hundreds of times the lethal dose for a human. But! They're preyed upon by birds that have evolved limited immunity to tetrodotoxin. So the newts are stuck always trying to become more toxic, and the birds are stuck always trying to become more immune, and they sit at this uneasy level where the birds can't gorge themselves entirely on newts because then they'll die, but they can eat enough newts that it keeps the newt population down, and neither really has enough evolutionary wiggle room to adapt to their environment in any new ways besides becoming more poisonous and more poison immune. So it's almost like they're not really evolving to adapt to their environment, they're mostly just evolving to adapt to each other, and that means that one day the environment will kill them.
Very useful for describing situations where things are using all of their available energy trying to just maintain balance with a problem that will immediately kill them if they ever relax, and eventually kill them if they don't.
being a fox party at the mossy wood at 10 dont be late
rewatching Mamma Mia! and just. it’s so perfect in it’s imperfection. people are sweating and their hair is messy and the makeup is minimal and the older people have wrinkles and also look hot and the costuming is chaotic and perfect and the actors were a little tipsy and they mess up lines and aren’t always perfectly on pitch and some of them are clearly not singers or dancers but they look like they’re having so much fun and I really believe that they’re on a greek island that’s the site of Aphrodite’s fountain and god it’s just a perfect movie.
People really need to take a wider view of this paranoia about age gaps and realise this is how we lose the ability to build communities. You need to be able to realise that people can have things in common with you even if they grew up in a different time/place/culture. You also need to realise you can build communities with people who don’t have obvious things in common with you, that people can have the same goals and needs as you even if in most ways they’re very unlike you. Now, more than ever, we need to be able to work together to have any chance to stand ip against the few who have so, so much more power, money and influence than any of us do individually. We need to form communities that reach across age (and class and race and sexuality and so on…).
I... I have coworkers who are from 26 to like. 56. we have work in common?? the work we all do?? together?? commonly? all of us, at all of our ages???
Also I don't care what I have in common. I can strike up a conversation over plenty of shit I don't have in common. That's how you exchange information on topics. Learn To Ask A Question And A Follow-Up Question.
do these people not talk to their family members? I mean my niece and nephew are some of the coolest people out there and they are 30 years younger than me. Do they have nothing in common with their parents or aunts and uncles? My community elders in the fiber community are awesome and I have learned so much from them. And regularly do social things together.
it's such bs that the whole guilt-ridden stoic self-sacrificing martyr thing doesn't work outside of fiction. repressing all your emotions and neglecting your physical wellbeing should make you god's most tragically beautiful morally unassailable little soldier of righteousness but all it does is give you bad skin and gastrointestinal problems
like what do you MEAN the number 1 sexiest character trait of all time is just kind of offputting and bad for you in real life. next you'll tell me smoking has consequences other than looking like a mysterious badass
correct
thinking about the person on a forum years ago who described the noldolantë as a culmination of everything you feel while reading Tolkien’s work. it’s an underlying emotion, not a physical work. hang on I gotta find it again
this, oh my god, this. if this was your post from 2006 please step forward so I can examine your absolutely humongous brain.