just happy to be here

art is everywhere @solsburryhill is my main

[acorviart]

cicada (ceramic banner)

[shop] - ceramics drop on Aug 29, 2PM CT

[dhaaruni]

This is very good

[patitojus]

his dramatic ass

[swagsmeister]

a very happy hr season 2 filming day to all who celebrate

[fleurdulys]

The Girl and Death - Richard Bergh

1888

[verlierer-is-lost]

Shane waiting for practice to start in like 2006

[kellcarr]

Stable Night 💫 I love painting stables!

[rylandsgrace]

Peter “ACAB” parker

Bonus:

[jacobwren]

"But AI can't do your job. It can help you do your job, but that doesn't mean it's going to save anyone money. Take radiology: there's some evidence that AIs can sometimes identify solid-mass tumors that some radiologists miss, and look, I've got cancer. Thankfully, it's very treatable, but I've got an interest in radiology being as reliable and accurate as possible. If my Kaiser hospital bought some AI radiology tools and told its radiologists: "Hey folks, here's the deal. Today, you're processing about 100 x-rays per day. From now on, we're going to get an instantaneous second opinion from the AI, and if the AI thinks you've missed a tumor, we want you to go back and have another look, even if that means you're only processing 98 x-rays per day. That's fine, we just care about finding all those tumors." If that's what they said, I'd be delighted. But no one is investing hundreds of billions in AI companies because they think AI will make radiology more expensive, not even if that also makes radiology more accurate. The market's bet on AI is that an AI salesman will visit the CEO of Kaiser and make this pitch: "Look, you fire 9/10s of your radiologists, saving $20m/year, you give us $10m/year, and you net $10m/year, and the remaining radiologists' job will be to oversee the diagnoses the AI makes at superhuman speed, and somehow remain vigilant as they do so, despite the fact that the AI is usually right, except when it's catastrophically wrong. "And if the AI misses a tumor, this will be the human radiologist's fault, because they are the 'human in the loop.' It's their signature on the diagnosis." This is a reverse centaur, and it's a specific kind of reverse-centaur: it's what Dan Davies calls an "accountability sink." The radiologist's job isn't really to oversee the AI's work, it's to take the blame for the AI's mistakes. This is another key to understanding – and thus deflating – the AI bubble. The AI can't do your job, but an AI salesman can convince your boss to fire you and replace you with an AI that can't do your job. This is key because it helps us build the kinds of coalitions that will be successful in the fight against the AI bubble." - Cory Doctorow, The Reverse Centaur’s Guide to Criticizing AI

[detroitlib]

From our stacks: Illustration from Songs of the Birds By Walter Garstang. With Illustrations by J. A. Shepherd. London: John Lane The Bodley Head Limited, 1923.

[almosteleanorrigby-deactivated2]

“Double exposure photo taken of Richard Mansfield who played the dual role of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in a stage production in 1887″

[doritosliker]

someone a couple days ago tweeted the phrase "club mccarrol is electrocuting himself on queen & spadina" and i genuinely haven't been able to stop thinking about it

[mattsheadband]

adding it for ref bc it made me laugh out loud when i first read it

[camelidae]

If you’ve been wondering why getting a dragon as your wizardly familiar is so often discouraged, please understand that it isn’t so much that alchemical experiments and curious dragons don’t mix, it’s that they WANT to mix SO badly.

[fruitgravies]

ah ! ah !

insta • twt • bsky

[s0uvlakii]

the piano teacher by elfriede jelinek (trans. joachim neugroschel)

[rpfofficial]

something ive been thinking about in terms of the wide fandomisation of ntbts is the danger of misrepresenting it & downplaying some of its aspects to people who might see fanworks and think it's something they should get into. & this is definitely something im guilty of too cos i do reblog art and analysis that leans towards the more tender & censored elements of ntb, but we have to remember that on the surface level and the first encounter with the material it is edgy white guy internet humour, a good third of the webseries relies on racism for its jokes, and the vice show & movie are not 'innocent' in comparison. [& the fact that the movie won best original song for a scene that is, putting it lightly, an extremely racist caricature is emblematic of the issue, ie how ingrained the racism is in the art itself and the industry its supported by]. at other levels, ntbts is a really fun work of art that carries a lot of interesting points on art and creativity, and friendship and homosociality, and the experience of having lots of media based interests, an enthusiasm for films and TV and video games that obviously a lot of the fanbase can relate to. but even at its core, the stimulating and sweet and even the intoxicating and intriguingly unhealthy aspects like the codependency and the inherent ways matt and jay hurt and manipulate each other, those all stand side by side with the fact that this is white canadian media property created almost exclusively by men, imbued so deeply with the casual sexism and racism that comes with that. and unfortunately those are also aspects that a lot of the fanbase can relate to, many of us being young white people on the internet who do engage with or at the very least surrounded by that kind of bigoted humour. anyway. my point is that the fandom's choice to regularly either ignore those aspects or even woobify them as just another trait of "our problematic boys" is actually much more malicious than we may realise, considering there is a proportion of the fandom that is NOT white and have very many reasonable complaints and criticisms of both the franchise and the creators, matt johnson being the most outspoken and at the forefront of it. and i genuinely believe there is a merit to this being a topic of conversation as readily discussed and critiqued as any other aspect, like the homoeroticism, like the autism. it's all equally prevalent in the material. i am for sure complicit in everything ive just pointed out, too, but it shouldn't hurt to bring this kind of thing further to the forefront of the analysis that happens online. don't sacrifice important criticisms and critical engagement with something as a whole just so you can get along with enjoying it "in peace."

[days-of-reading]

Maggie Nelson, The Argonauts