marimo's blog

mostly lupin screenshots also other stuff I like

[subterraneandebutante]

I’ve taken almost 500 screenshots while watching lupin iii over the past few years so I’m just gonna start posting them here with little or no context

[polarity-disturbed]

With the whole "Markiplier making his own DVD copies of Iron Lung to sell" thing, it's been fascinating and slightly concerning how many people seem to genuinely believe that if a physical release isn't coming from a giant corporation, it must automatically be a bootleg.

Look at me.

Look me directly in the eyes while I say this.

You can just make things.

You can simply create something and put it into the world.

That's allowed.

People have been doing it for centuries.

They sell blank VHS tapes. They sell blank DVDs. Blank CDs. You can buy flash drives by the bucketful if you really want to. If you create a movie, an album, a game, a documentary, or a four-hour video essay about the mating habits of fictional space goblins, you are entirely permitted to put that thing on physical media and sell it.

That is not piracy.

Piracy is taking something that belongs to someone else and reproducing or distributing it without permission.

If I buy a DVD of a movie, I own that copy of the movie. I do not own the movie itself. I didn't acquire the rights to duplicate it, press a thousand copies, and start selling them out of my garage like I've become the regional distributor for Warner Bros.

The copyright, distribution rights, and intellectual property still belong to whoever created it or whoever legally acquired those rights.

If I start burning copies of Iron Lung and selling them myself without Markiplier's permission, that's piracy.

If Markiplier, who made and owns the rights to Iron Lung, burns copies and sells them himself, that's just distribution.

He's the rights holder.

He's distributing his own work.

If you made it, if it came from your own mind, your own work, your own time, your own resources, then congratulations. You own the thing. You don't need a corporation to bless it with legitimacy.

The corporation is not what makes it real.

The fact that it exists is what makes it real.

I think we've accidentally spent so many years living inside a world dominated by mass-produced media that some people have developed the strange assumption that all media emerges from a factory somewhere. As if films naturally occur in shrink-wrapped plastic cases and descend from the heavens aboard a pallet truck.

But independent artists have been burning discs, dubbing tapes, printing books, pressing records, and mailing things directly to people for longer than many of us have been alive.

That's not a bootleg.

That's just a product.

It's not "bootleg."

It's just... leg.

The normal kind.

The original, free-range, locally sourced leg.

[jackthelemmon]

i love u frank

[bayesic-bitch]

Tell me, Adeimantus — you who have spent so many hours in the discords and subreddits of our people — what is it that distinguishes a shounen anime from a shoujo?

I confess I have never considered the matter carefully, Socrates. I suppose shounen is for boys and shoujo is for girls?

A fine beginning. But let us look deeper. Imagine a young boy, playing with his toys. Does he not bash them together?

He does, yes.

And do he and his friends not argue endlessly over which of their toys would win in a fight?

Constantly, and with great passion.

Now imagine a young girl, playing with her toys. Does she not make them kiss?

…She does.

Does she not argue with her friends not over who would win in a fight, but over who belongs with whom?

I begin to see where you are going.

And if Aphrodite has been kind, and has bestowed upon her the φουτζόσι nature — does she not find her brother's Naruto and Sasuke toys, and make them explore each other's bodies?

I — yes, Socrates. I suppose she does.

Then the soul of shounen discourse is powerscaling — who beats whom — and the soul of shoujo discourse is shipping — who loves whom, and how, and with what degree of emotional devastation.

That seems correct.

Now. Is there a further distinction to be made, within these categories? Between those who are, as the moderns say, woke, and those who are chuds?

I think there must be, though I am uncertain how to draw it.

Consider: is it not the woke who care deeply about the precise definitions of abuse and consent — who will debate endlessly about power imbalances and trauma responses and what exactly constitutes a toxic dynamic?

It is. I have seen these debates. They are very long.

And do the chuds not repudiate such pretensions entirely, and concern themselves only with who is the most attractive — who, as they put it, is best to goon to?

They do, and they are also very loud about it.

Good. Then let us apply this framework to some examples, so that we may be sure we understand it. What of Dragon Ball Z?

Clearly a shounen. The discourse is entirely about power levels. Goku versus Superman. Whether Vegeta could beat Frieza if he had another week to train. Neither especially woke nor especially chud — simply loud.

Ouran High School Host Club?

Shoujo, plainly. The discourse is entirely about which host Haruhi should end up with. Neither particularly woke nor unwoke — simply romantic.

Steven Universe?

Woke shoujo, and almost insultingly obvious. The entire discourse concerns whether various gems were abusive toward Steven, what his codependency with his father means, and whether Spinel deserved better. I have never once seen anyone ask whether Steven could beat a particular gem in a fight. I have seen thousands of words written about whether Pink Diamond was a victim or a perpetrator.

And now — Chainsaw Man?

Surely it is a shounen? It has a chainsaw for a head. There are extremely gory fight scenes. I would have said… neither woke nor chud, perhaps. But certainly shounen.

Think carefully, Adeimantus. Did not the scene in the back alley, with Yoru, and the nature of what she offered Denji — did that not spark hundreds of Reddit threads?

…It did. I remember them. They were quite heated.

And were they debating whether Denji could beat a given devil in a fight?

No. They were debating whether what occurred constituted a meaningful violation, given Denji's initial objection and Asa's anger.

Consent and abuse discourse.

…Yes.

And do not some fans still mourn Reze, and insist she was the one who truly understood Denji? While others argue passionately that Asa is the only one who could give him what he actually needs?

The shipping wars are, I will admit, extensive.

And have you ever — even once — heard Chainsaw Man fans argue about whether Denji could beat a particular devil in a straight fight?

…I cannot say that I have.

Then observe what we have found. Chainsaw Man's discourse is concerned not with power, but with relationships. It is therefore shoujo. Its discourse is concerned not with attractiveness, but with abuse, consent, and emotional damage. It is therefore woke. And thus —

Astonishing, Otakrates. Chainsaw Man is a woke shoujo manga.

I could not have said it better myself.

[wobblebees]

Being a notorious robotlover in the current state of "AI" is the worst. I love robots discovering how they process their feelings in fiction, but when a chatbot pretends it knows how to love it feels like an insult to the craft

[ctimenefic]

Seasonal Affective Disorder is just emotional scurvy, all my core wounds are reopening and they won't be fixed until the big lemon in the sky comes back

[life-in-a-monospace-typeface]

The Shibari Game

At a conference/festival last year, there was a Shibari workshop on the schedule for some reason, although the topic of the event was prediction markets. This led to the following exchange (all names changed):

Adam (who at the time was basically a stranger to me): Hmm, "Shibari"... What is that, some kind of Jewish ritual?

Me: No, it's-

Barbara: EVERYONE SHUT UP! Ok. Nobody tell this man what shibari is.

Everyone: ...?

Barbara: We’re playing 20 questions.

Thus began what was by far the best game of 20 questions I have ever witnessed. There were... appreciably more than 20 questions.

[literally ten minutes of questions later]

Adam: Ok, so! Shibari... is a Japanese social export, it's an activity somebody does, it's in some way artistic, it does not involve drawing, it does not involve writing, it involves an inorganic object and an organic object, and... the organic object is a human, right?

Everyone: Right

Adam: And the inorganic object...

Barbara: Well...

Chris: The inanimate object

Adam: The inanimate object, which, oh, which is organic, which suggests that it's clothes... Is the inanimate object clothing?

Everyone: No

Me: To clarify, the inanimate object is always organic in terms of 'organic chemistry', but might or might not be, like, made from biological material

Adam: Ok. And so, you have an inanimate object, and you have a person... The person does not have to do anything during the... shibari activity. You are doing a manipulation to the inanimate object, with the person, for purposes that are fun... Is it for the entertainment of a group?

Barbara: Could be? ...

Adam: So it could be for the entertainment of a group, but it could be for the entertainment of the individuals?

Everyone: Right

Adam: Ok. The inanimate object - the equipment - right? It is not specialised, but is a common object, correct?

Everyone: yeah

AI

Adam: Does it have anything at all to do with AI?

Everyone: [laughter] No

Adam: I had to check. In this setting, everything turns back to AI at some point

Me: I would say no

Frank: Not yet!

Me: Right, not yet. But yeah, 'No' is definitely the answer to that one

George: I trust Rob Miles on this

Barbara: As an expert in shibari?

Frank: As an expert in AI Shibari. I think that's what it's called.

Chris: Oh, yeah it kind of is!

Can one shibari by accident?

Adam: Ok. Is it something that one might do without knowing that it is shibari?

Everyone: [cacophony of disagreement]

Me: Interesting question!

Frank: Very interesting question.

Barbara: It's totally plausible that someone would do something that would qualify as shibari without knowing the Japanese artform

Me: Yeah, and they might also have seen things about it but not know the name of it

Chatting during shibari

Adam: Does it involve talking?

Everyone: No, not necessarily

Adam: God Dammit. Agh, I thought it might be... talking using some prop or something

Barbara: For me it always involves talking, but it's...

Adam: One doesn't have to?

Barbara: It's just 'cause I don't stop talking

[laughter]

Adam: And it doesn't involve betting markets in any way?

Everyone: No

How technologically advanced is shibari equipment?

Adam: Ok. Is the object technologically difficult to make?

Everyone: No

One guy: Yes

Everyone: What? No it isn't!

Adam: Is it only available in an industrialised economy?

Everyone: No

That one guy again: Yes!

Everyone: NO!!!

The guy: No, you're right, I'm sorry... But it is difficult to make

George: Every object is difficult to make!

Barbara: Maybe you're confused about what shibari is

Ed: Yeah, you should be up there with Adam

Adam: Would it have been available before industrialisation?

Everyone: Yes!

Adam: Ok. Um... is it a stick?

Everyone: It's not a stick

No cheap tricks allowed

Adam: I feel like I'm gonna get close to covering everything...

Me: I feel like we were very close just now, when you were like "Well what could this object be?"

Adam: Ok so the object is important. It's... before industrialisation... Does it begin with a letter before-

Everyone: No, no, we're not doing that. N/A

Adam: Ok so it starts with an N and an A...

[laughter]

What is this dang object?

Adam: Ok... so... is the object artificially pigmented?

Everyone: Can be, but not necessarily

Adam: Is it commonly painted?

Everyone: No

Adam: Is it commonly dyed?

Everyone: Yes

Adam: Ok, is it something that it's very common to dye in other purposes?

Everyone: Yeah

Adam: Does it involve a vegetable, of some kind?

Everyone: ...No?

Adam: Does it involve a plant?

Everyone: [confusion about what 'involve' means]

George: The object can have... some relation to a plant

Me: eehhh, that's more confusing than helpful. We already said that it can be biologically derived

Adam: But it would have been available before industrialisation?

Everyone: Yeah

Adam: So it's got to be something that is... around. Is it something that requires human modification to make into the form we know and love?

Everyone: Yes

Adam: Uh.. does this processing require specialised skill?

Everyone: Yeah, some skill for sure

Adam: Would I be able to do it? Like, without training?

Everyone: Probably not

Ed: On a long enough time horizon you'd figure it out, but the answer is basically no

Adam: Like, you throw me in with the tools to make it and say "come out in an hour", could I...

Everyone: No, probably not

Adam: But other people would be able to make it in an hour?

Everyone: Yeah, with the right skills

It’s not a weapon

Adam: Does it involve a weapon of any kind?

Everyone: No.

George: How creative are you allowed to-

Everyone: The answer's no

What shape is the object?

[long pause]

Adam: Well... does anyone else have any questions?

Barbara: You're asking such good questions though!

Ed: Yeah you're doing a good job

Danielle: I think you should ask more questions about the shape of the object

Everyone: Oh, great suggestion

Adam: Ok, is it spherical?

Everyone: No

Adam: Is it cylindrical?

Everyone: Yyeeaahh, sort of, yeah.

Adam: So it's not a pure cylinder but it's cylindrical-ish?

Everyone: Yeah

Adam: Is it an ovaloid?

Everyone: No.

Adam: Is it an ellipsoid?

Everyone: No

Adam: Is it uh... hmm... But it's longer than it is wide?

Everyone: Yes!!!

[scattered applause, we're close now]

Adam: Is it a plank of wood?

Everyone: No!!!

Barbara: It still isn't that!

Frank: No, his previous guess was stick

Adam: Yeah, a plank of wood requires processing and I couldn't make it... like it fits a lot of the other questions

Barbara: No you're right, that's fair, I'm convinced. It is a plank of wood.

Where is the object?

Adam: Could I find it inside a building or outside a building?

Everyone: Yes...

Adam: Wait. I mean. Ok, can you find it in a bathroom?

Everyone: Not really

Adam: Can you find it in a kitchen?

Everyone: Probably not

Adam: Can you find it lying on the ground?

Everyone: Yeah possibly

Adam: Is it something that people commonly use?

Everyone: Yeah

Adam: Is it something that people would pick up if they saw it lying there?

Everyone: Nah

It’s really not a weapon

Adam: Is it something that is dangerous at all?

Everyone: Can be, but not especially

Adam: Is any part of it sharp?

Everyone: No

Adam: Can any part of it fragment?

Everyone: [???]

Adam: Like, is it brittle?

Everyone: No

Adam: So it's firm?

Everyone: No

Adam: Is it flexible?

Everyone: Yes!!

Adam: Ok! Is it a pool noodle?

Everyone: [laughter]

Adam: Which is cylindrical, flexible, and organic, dyed but not painted...

Everyone: No, we're so proud of you, you're doing great

Me: But we did say "pre-industrial"

Pinning down the object

Adam: Ok ok. Is it a solid?

Everyone: Yes

Adam: Is it any of the solid hybrids, like a colloid or a gel?

Everyone: No

Adam: Does it retain its shape after being bent?

Everyone: Uh... yes?

Adam: So it doesn't spring back with any force?

Everyone: No, it doesn't spring back

Adam: Ok... so... Is it Japanese in origin, or is it found around the world?

Everyone: [assorted contradictory statements]

Me: The origin of the practice is Japan, but the origin of the object is all over

Adam: Is the object put on a person?

Everyone: Yes!

Adam: Is the object... um... is the object rope?

Everyone: YES!!

[scattered applause]

Me: The object is rope!

Adam: Ok!

Me: Now bring it home

Bringing it home?

Adam: Are things hung upon the rope?

Everyone: Uuuuummmmmm. Ambiguous? No.

Adam: Is the rope itself... does the rope look good?

Everyone: Yes!

Adam: Ok! Is this putting-on... a mark of esteem?

Everyone: No?? ???

[laughter]

Adam: So the object is a rope, and you're putting the rope on somebody

Everyone: Yes!

Adam: You're... putting rope on somebody!

Everyone: Yeah!

Adam: Is that... is that not the practice?

Everyone: No, no, it is, it is!

[confused cheering. Are we done?]

We’re not done

Chris: But, no, come on, there's more to it!

Ed: You're missing something critical!

Chris: You're so close!

Adam: Ok. Do you... hang someone?

Everyone: [strongly conflicting opinions]

Barbara: Only if you're doing it extremely wrong

Adam: Ok. But you can tie knots?

Everyone: YES!

Adam: Ok! Do you tie... is it a bracelet of some-

Everyone: No!

Adam: So it's not an adornment of any kind...

Everyone: Well...

Where on the body?

Adam: Is it put on your neck?

Chris: No

Danielle: Well, can be...

Adam: On your head?

Everyone: Can be

Adam: On a limb?

Everyone: Yeah

Adam: It's on a limb

Me: Not exclusively

Adam: On an arm?

Everyone: Can be

Adam: On a leg?

Everyone: Can be

Adam: On... uh... I've run out of limbs...

What does it mean?

Adam: Ok, it's rope, you put it on somebody, it's Japanese in origin... does it... signify something?

Everyone: Not really

Adam: Hmm. Do you tie the rope in a loop?

Everyone: ...Yeah??

Adam: I'm wondering, is it the casting of ropes upon people, like uh...

Chris: It's not a lasso, no

Frank: I like the idea of shibari as, like, a carnival game...

Barbara: I'm unclear on what the win condition is here...

Ed: I feel like there is a really important component that we haven't got yet

Everyone: Yeah, when he gets that component, he’s won

Are people into shibari?

Adam: Hmm... Did you find yourself fired by enthusiasm to do it upon being told about it?

Several people: Yes

Me: Personally no, but...

[laughter]

Adam: So it has mixed appeal?

Barbara: That is absolutely correct

Can one shibari... too hard?

Adam: Is it um, does it involve the tying of knots?

Everyone: YES

Adam: Ok. Are there knots that are peculiar to shibari?

Everyone: yeah

Adam: Is the learning of knots, or the tying of knots upon other people the important part?

Everyone: Uh... yes?

Adam: Do you tie someone up and they attempt to escape?

Everyone: Uh, not necessarily, but like, often.

Me: Yes is closer than no, I think

Adam: Ok, you tie rope on someone. Do you have to use some sort of special rope for it? Can you use any rope?

Barbara: You can use any rope, but some are better than others

Adam: So you wouldn't want to use any rough ropes, or...

Danielle: No, you do, that's actually preferred

Adam: You prefer rough ropes?

Chris: Some do

Frank: It depends

Danielle: Natural fibers tend to be rougher

Adam: Does it chafe?

Danielle: It can, but ideally not

Adam: Would you do it even if you were injured in the process of doing it?

Frank: No

Barbara: You would not want that to happen generally

Adam: Uh... Does it look cool?

Everyone: Yes!!

Origami?

Adam: So you're tying knots that look cool... is it like an origami for knots?

Everyone: [confused disagreement]

Ed: It's not about the knots

Chris: It's totally about the knots!

Frank: It's all about the cones...

Adam: Like, in origami you fold paper in ways that look cool, maybe you tie knots in ways that look cool?

Everyone: [loud disagreement]

Diagnosing the problem

[long long pause]

Chris: Ask the question in your heart!

Adam: ...Neckties?

Everyone: No?

Barbara: I keep thinking "But, he already has it", and then he asks a question that makes me say "No, he doesn't have it at all"

Frank: I think there's a question you want to ask, but you're not...

Everyone: Yeah

Chris: Yeah, ask the question that you don't want to ask

Danielle: I don't think he has the question...

Adam: Would it cause any gratification in someone?

Everyone: Yes!

Adam: Would it... Would it cause sexual gratification?

Everyone: Yes!!

Adam: Is it a practice... under the category of kink?

Everyone: Yes!!!

Adam: Is it tying somebody up for bondage purposes?

Everyone: YEAH!!! [Pandemonium, hollering, applause, Adam is lifted above the cheering crowd]

After the hearty congratulations were done, I wandered off, elated from the experience, and I bumped into a group of friends.

"Friends!" I said, "I just had the funniest experience. This guy didn't know what 'shibari' was, so we-"

"Shibari?" a friend interjected, "What is that, like, a Jewish building?"

"OK EVERYONE SHUT UP" I said.

[xiaq]

Let’s talk about AI (the good, the bad, the ugly)

Hi, I work in tech and I’m also an author and I feel we need to have a chat. Because I’m seeing a lot of misinformation/conflation happening.

There are many different kinds of AI, and disagreement about what should even be termed “AI” in the industry (it’s the hot new thing, so companies are rebranding all sorts of products they offer as “AI” which is muddying the waters re what is Artificial Intelligence and what’s just a sparkling workflow). That being said, let’s go over some key terminology/how these iterations differ.

Narrow AI: This is a limited, passive, task-specific kind of AI. It’s programmed to respond within certain constraints. Narrow AI is behind the chat bot you talk to when you want to make an Amazon return, or voice assistants you speak to when trying to make an insurance claim. They don’t learn; if you ask them a question outside their purview, they will not provide an answer. Narrow AI can be useful for efficiency and saving costs (it can also be hella annoying if you’re stuck speaking to one that can’t help you with your problem and you don’t know the magic set of words to get to an actual person who can).

Agentic AI: This is a more advanced system that attempts to mimic human decision-making within a specific context using LLMs. This is a model that can “learn” and adapt. There are many subsets of Machine Learning within Agentic AI like Supervised learning—where a system can be trained to identify something by certain characteristics (used for cancer detection!) or Unsupervised Learning which is a matching/pattern recognition exercise (like identifying new disease subgroups!). Agentic AI can also help more generally with looking at current patient data within the context of their medical history/the most up-to-date medical best practices, and provide insights. Aside from use in the medical industry, Agentic AI might be used within larger corporations for supply chain management—monitoring and automating interactions between suppliers, vendors, freight companies, etc. to make sure the correct number of products are ordered and shipped at the correct time to the correct locations, even if those numbers fluctuate seasonally. It can be used for companies who want to enable self-service for their business units to query data and create new data sets based on those queries using natural language (“show me all customers who purchased x product within this time frame in this geographic location,” “now create a new data set with this information”). Like Narrow AI, Agentic AI can improve efficiency, and is helpful in contexts when the breadth of data/moving parts involved is so substantial a human may not be equipped to manage it alone. However, it still needs to be implemented responsibly (more on that after Generative AI).

Predictive AI: This uses pattern recognition/machine learning/statistics/algorithms to predict outcomes. Predictive AI taps into an amount of data that was previously not possible for human teams to manage (much like Agentic AI). Predictive AI can anticipate stock market changes, extreme weather, mechanical issues, supply chain impacts, healthcare outcomes, crime surges, and more, saving time, money, and potentially even preventing major problems like vehicle recalls and death due to natural disasters. However, predictive AI is limited by the data it’s trained on, which has resulted in algorithmic biases (like when used in law enforcement/policing contexts, or healthcare contexts). So, as is true for any of the AI models I’ve mentioned so far, while it can be a positive tool, implementors should be cognizant of the fallible, human, foundation it’s built upon and try to mitigate bias.

Generative AI: This is what most people think of when they think of AI, thanks to chatbots like ChatGPT. Generative AI is a regurgitative leech. It creates “new” content based on the massive amounts of data it has been trained on. Nothing it creates is actually new, though. When you ask it to write a story or create a picture, it’s using an amalgamation of the writing and art it has copied from real creators without credit. There is very little useful about Generative AI. Especially when you consider the environmental ramifications of using it. Generative AI used within a social context (as a therapist/friend/romantic stand-in) is dangerous. And if used as an authoritative search engine (which is disturbingly prevalent, now) it’s equally problematic due to common issues like hallucinations, the spread of fabricated news stories/outlets, dangerous deepfakes, extremist bias, and more. And if you’re thinking, well I just use it to help with outlining papers/re-writing emails/condensing notes, there are already studies that raise concerns about generative AI weakening critical thinking skills. I cannot tell you how relieved I am that I left my job as a professor the year before ChatGPT came out.

Now, to be fair, a lot of Agentic AI depends on LLMs, as I mentioned, which makes it prone to encountering the same sorts of issues with hallucinations/bias. But in my experience, companies are aware of this and, when implementing responsibly, use Agentic AI as a tool that requires supervision and adjustment, not some holy, infallible, authority like many generative AI users.

My point here is that lumping all AI together as good or bad is not beneficial. There’s some really important nuance! Anyway.

TL;DR my personal thoughts on AI:

Narrow AI—Can be Good when implemented appropriately!

Agentic AI—Can be Good when implemented appropriately!

Predictive AI—Can be Good when implemented appropriately!

Generative AI—Kill it with fire.

[lolita-wardrobe]

She said: "60 is the right age to wear Lolita." (credits to 随心 on RedNote)

[omercifulheaves]

Seijun Suzuki

[fangirlsovertoomanythings]

[ IMG ID: A picture of a balding man wearing glasses, gray moustache and goatee, saying: “Action films are for women. They like the bloodthirsty stuff” / END ID ]

[subterraneandebutante]

[subterraneandebutante]

[subterraneandebutante]

[khvylovy]

dear usamerican high schoolers looking for a way to resist fascism: sit through the pledge of allegiance.

no getting up. no looking at the flag.

everyone will be looking at you. you'll be sweating like a fucking hippopotamus. your teacher will sternly tell you to get up. you'll feel stupid and that maybe its not worth it because you're just a kid in a classroom. but I'm here to remind you that there are no real life consequences to detention. there are however real life consequences to resisting a thoughtless performance of nationalism.

[roach-works]

not to talk tough but i have sat through every pledge of allegiance in my life, and that includes the bush administration's hyper-patriotic war on terror.

you can NOT be compelled to say the pledge, and that also means you can't be given the 'choice' of doing it or taking a punishment. being sent into the hall is a grey area.

if you are punishing for refusing, parents or a more sympathetic teacher (like say a history or english teacher) can step in to intercede with the principal. do not be afraid to escalate.

it is critical now of all times that you PRACTICE civil disobedience, starting small, sticking to it, and working up, this will help you learn how very much disobedience you can actually get away with in this life, which is actually a hell of a lot.

[subterraneandebutante]

I sat for it in highschool every time and for no real reason I just disliked authority and patriotism and my cool punk friends were doing it

[subterraneandebutante]

[subterraneandebutante]

[subterraneandebutante]