That post about death note being "everyone's first anime" (untrue statement) made me curious and now I want to gather data for science
Can you reblog this and tell me where are you from and what was your starter anime?

if i look back, i am lost

blake kathryn
art blog(derogatory)
Misplaced Lens Cap
No title available

oozey mess
Jules of Nature
I'd rather be in outer space šø
šŖ¼

pixel skylines
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"

romaā
One Nice Bug Per Day
Sade Olutola

shark vs the universe
occasionally subtle

PR's Tumblrdome
h
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her

seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from United States
seen from Albania

seen from Nigeria

seen from United States

seen from Netherlands

seen from Canada
seen from Singapore
seen from Philippines

seen from South Africa
seen from Vietnam
seen from Ukraine
seen from United States
seen from Chile

seen from Canada
seen from T1
seen from United States
seen from Botswana
seen from South Africa

seen from United Kingdom
@thevivariumlounge
That post about death note being "everyone's first anime" (untrue statement) made me curious and now I want to gather data for science
Can you reblog this and tell me where are you from and what was your starter anime?
I'm a big fan of wizards-as-programmers, but I think it's so much better when you lean into programming tropes.
A spell the wizard uses to light the group's campfire has an error somewhere in its depths, and sometimes it doesn't work at all. The wizard spends a lot of his time trying to track down the exact conditions that cause the failure.
The wizard is attempting to create a new spell that marries two older spells together, but while they were both written within the context of Zephyrus the Starweaver's foundational work, they each used a slightly different version, and untangling the collisions make a short project take months of work.
The wizard has grown too comfortable reusing old spells, and in particular, his teleportation spell keeps finding its components rearranged and remixed, its parts copied into a dozen different places in the spellbook. This is overall not actually a problem per se, but the party's rogue grows a bit concerned when the wizard's "drying spell" seems to just be a special case of teleportation where you teleport five feet to the left and leave the wetness behind.
A wizard is constantly fiddling with his spells, making minor tweaks and changes, getting them easier to cast, with better effects, adding bells and whistles. The "shelter for the night" spell includes a tea kettle that brings itself to a boil at dawn, which the wizard is inordinately pleased with. He reports on efficiency improvements to the indifference of anyone listening.
A different wizard immediately forgets all details of his spells after he's written them. He could not begin to tell you how any of it works, at least not without sitting down for a few hours or days to figure out how he set things up. The point is that it works, and once it does, the wizard can safely stop thinking about it.
Wizards enjoy each other's company, but you must be circumspect about spellwork. Having another wizard look through your spellbook makes you aware of every minor flaw, and you might not be able to answer questions about why a spell was written in a certain way, if you remember at all.
Wizards all have their own preferences as far as which scripts they write in, the formatting of their spellbook, its dimensions and material quality, and of course which famous wizards they've taken the most foundational knowledge from. The enlightened view is that all approaches have their strengths and weaknesses, but this has never stopped anyone from getting into a protracted argument.
Sometimes a wizard will sit down with an ancient tome attempting to find answers to a complicated problem, and finally find someone from across time who was trying to do the same thing, only for the final note to be "nevermind, fixed it".
"This spell causes the hair to fall off cats." "It works with my tome"
"This spell causes the hair to fall off cats." "That's fixed in Xaranthius' latest publication, you just have to rewrite your entire spellbook for compatibility."
"This spell causes the hair to fall of cats." "Magister Olaus of Writhington uses it to help with his allergies. WORKING AS INTENDED."
I want to see wizards snarking at each other over different magical languages/scripts, the same way programmers do it over different languages.
Sure, "High Tower is a powerful language, but it's such a pain to write. I just use Unity* as it's simple to write and can do nearly everything I need" "cranky because you can't memorize all the conjugations and declensions, aren't you?" "LOOK MAN, I CAN MEMORIZE ANYTHING, INCLUDING THE FACE OF YOUR MOTHER IN ECSTASY. IN FACT, BEHOLD!" *a little time window appears between them, demonstrating exactly that. The first wizard (seen through the window) turns around and winks at the "camera".
"you kids today with your lizardman. How can you get anything done in a language without gendered pronouns? It's like fingerpainting. Sure you can learn on it but once you've got the basics you should switch over to a REAL language"
"the Kalic have been here already. We better get out before the rest of their army marches in." "how can you be sure?" "you see that teleport?" "no" "well, if you COULD see it, you'd see it's written in Adevic Yevi. That's the Kalic magic language." "couldn't it be someone else? We saw those Monon traders, maybe one of them..." "no. No one writes Adevic Yevi unless they're being paid to. It's a language written by committee."
Wizards going on a quest to get the spellbooks for a lost spell, only to find out that it was written in skydove cant. No one can read that shit! The creator must have been one of those weird "functional wizards". (They're obsessed with making sure their spells have no side effects)
There's a small library on the outskirts of Freeport which tries to collect versions of basic spells in every language. The Adevic Yevi version of "fireball" takes up 7 pages, mostly boilerplate setting up the interfaces with fire and explosions and ExplodingMagicalBallFactorySingletons. The Lizardman version is basically "AHAHAHA, YOU GO BOOM!"
There's a bunch of wizard apprentices working on porting an old "Summon Bread and Fishes" spell from the absolutely archaic language it was written in. Once it's in Unity, it'll be easy to modify and teach to more wizards, which'll obviously be good for disaster areas. It's just too expensive to keep paying the ancient guys who can still do magic in TRAN-FOR.
Eccentric wizards keep inventing new languages for spells. You look at them and they're neat, but it'll never catch on. And either you're right, or the next time you're applying to be a court wizard, the advisors want to know if you have at least 5 years experience in Tilted Runic and you're like "it only came out 2 years ago!" "aren't you a chronomancer?" "oh good point. Yeah I've been using it for 20-30 years."
There's wizards who will spend incredible amounts of time doing silly things with spells in strange ways. There's this guy (Vorth) who made his own language where there's only one basic spell: fireball. Everything else is basic magic glue tying multiple fireballs together. So like, he's got a breakfast spell. Stand back (good advice for all his spells), and you'll see a fish get knocked out of the local pond, flung through the air by successive explosions, and eventually it lands on his plate, nicely cooked and deboned, if slightly charred (the glass of milk is harder to explain). His magical door locks involve a quicksilver sphere and molten lead changing shape when heated... It's tricky but it seems to work. He's working on a teleport spell, but so far it's mainly just killed test subjects (primarily sheep from a nearby farm).
* so the funny thing here is that this isn't a reference to the unity game engine. The main country in my One Hundred and One Magical Pistols setting is called "the union" and their language is called "unity".
It's wands vs staves vs bare hands.
Wanders are like "they're available everywhere and once you learn how to do it it's so powerful!"
Staffguys always talk about how you can do ANYTHING with a staff. Wanders claim it's a pain to carry around an overpowered device that can do ANYTHING when you just need to cast fireball or a simple one man teleport.
Meanwhile the bare wizards are showing off how they don't need any magical tools and can just do hand motions.
Wanders and staffguys retort that when a spell goes wrong, THEY need to go to store for a new magical tool. YOU need new hands.
surviving the current age of internet means saying no to subscriptions and premiums for basic features. you must endure the inconvenience of not being able to use every server emoji in discord. you must build the patience to find alternatives like NewPipe so you can listen to music on youtube while your phone screen sleeps. do Not give these corporations your limited disposable income. tiktok not letting me view videos on my phone without downloading the app? i will outlast tiktok and the execs will be remembered as dull,disgusting capitalists. listen to me, listen to me. if you do not know how to pirate shows from hulu, learn. if you can't pirate it, it is not worth the money to rent it. please i'm on my hands and knees. do not accept this form of internet.
im not american but i consider myself a pragmatist and i am also somewhat familiar w fascism so here are my thoughts in the current electoral climate as far as i can cater them to my perception of the userbase of this website in particular:
if you live in a swing state, vote for whoever you want but do not sabotage or criticize campaigns to pressure kamala on israel (and these include campaigns such as uncommitted)
if u live in a blue or red state, vote jill stein so the green party can reach 5%
don't tell palestinians who to vote for
don't belittle genocide to convince people not to vote for trump
vote blue if you want to, but understand when you vote for the lesser evil (to you) it is still evil and you should be accountable for it. voting for the lesser evil is not harm reduction when the harm includes a genocide. this accountability includes understanding the anger against every biden admin policy, of which the foreign policy particularly has killed between ~40 to ~170 thousand people, and at least twenty thousand children.
you aren't making the correct moral choice when you vote blue, you are making a machiavellian one and you should view it as such. you have no guarantees your organizing or your conditions will survive another democrat administration either. nobody voted biden expecting him to embrace a genocide. like the current labour government, democrats are not reliable partners for even the smallest of their progressive campaign promises. it is not materialist or realist or whatever; it is base self-preservation.
i know thats not a catchy campaign slogan though, but if you're going to campaign (or as muhammed el-kurd put it, if you're going to laugh at the memes) you should do it with your eyes open
if your organizing cannot withstand the inherent and cruel contradiction of campaigning for and voting for people facilitating a genocide, if it cannot navigate this moment with humanity, thoughtfulness and understanding, and above all with the goal of preventing such an atrocity from happening again, and preventing americans from being forced to vote for genocidiares, then it is functionally no different to a trump rally. simply stating 'yes all american presidents are evil' is not sufficient, just as you know that saying 'thoughts and prayers' in response to a school shooting is not sufficient. see above for guidelines.
don't be callous or dismissive of any of this.
Research
my neighbourhood has never had an ice cream truck. in the summer, we have the knife sharpening truck. it slowly circles the block and rings its ominous bell. i have never seen someone interact with it. it may be that only those marked by death can see it
alex??? this is truly frightening ??
i never really thought about it much until today but youāre right this is honestly a messed up thing for me to be accustomed to
Thereās so much potential in using bloodbending for cool shit but noooo itās inherently evil I fucking guess
Like imagine a bloodbender who does the lie detector trick earth benders do by sensing someoneās heartbeat through the blood pumping
A doctor bloodbender whose knowledge of blood vessels allows them to do impeccably healed surgeries.
Thereās definitely more good you could do
I have an Avatar OC which accidentally develops bloodbending powers.
So Lau is a waterbender who lives in an icy swamp with his adoptive aunt/grandma. Because he's basically isolated from any waterbenders, he develops his own kind of bending style by copying one of the few aquatic creatures he can regularly observe... Cat-eels (catfish eels). Which makes his home cooked waterbending style really wiggly and unorthodox (using drunken fist like movements)
Gems of Lau's Cat-eel style waterbending include:
Dumping a bucket of water over yourself and soaking all your clothes for other techniques
Freezing water around your fist and punching really hard
Freezing the water at your knees to pull off matrix dodges
Using a bunch of weird contortions to strike from different angles using the aforementioned freezing joints trick
Freezing the bottom of your shoes to slide around like a vampire from one of those old movies
Getting up from the ground by bending your soaked clothes to pull yourself up to a standing position (yes like an old time vampire)
Using mud when water isn't readily avalible
Anyways after several years going on a journey (with a cute firebender that doesn't like firebending. Which is a whole other post), one of the big twists is that Lau has been... Uhhhh accidentally a bloodbender for a while... Turns out when a lot of your bending techniques involve bending water in close proximity to your body... It's not a stretch to think that you might start bending the water inside your body as well.
Because it's his own body, Lau's bloodbending bypasses the whole "only on the full moon" rule. And he eventually gets strong enough to bloodbend other people without the full moon (he still needs to have physical contact with people for it to work) it's still treated like a yikes thing to use on other people but there are a couple of times Lau uses it + waterbender healing to do this like get out of handcuffs
Maybe this is the wrong platform to pose this question given the average tumblr user but
Is it just me or did our generation (those of is who are currently 20-30 ish) just not get the opportunity to be young in the 'standard' sense?
Like, everyone I talk to who's over 40 has all their wild stories about their teens and 20s, being young and dumb, and then I talk to my friends and coworkers and classmates, and we just... dont.
My mom tells stories of skipping school to sneak across the border and spend the day at a bar in Mexico. I was threatened with not being allowed to graduate because of senior ditch day. One of my friends had to go to his first hour class on senior ditch day because the teacher, who almost exclusively taught seniors, arranged a huge exam that day with no available makeup days, specifically to punish kids who took part in ditch day. Our wild and crazy ditch day was playing mini golf and then stopping for ice cream on our way back to one of our friends' houses to play cards against humanity.
Don't get me wrong, we had fun. But all of that, threats of not graduating, threats of failing classes over a single test, over some mini golf and ice cream?
Throughout high school and early in college, my friend group got kicked out of malls, stores, and even a parking lot just for being there wrong. Not being loud of disruptive. Not causing problems. Just being there too long, or without buying anything.
My mom graduated high school, after repeating her senior year, without a single grade above a D, and was offered a full ride scholarship to a state university to play on their women's football team. I had a 3.8 GPA, multiple extracurriculars, a summer job, and over 100 hours of volunteer work, and barely got into that same university, and then couldn't afford to go there anyway.
We've made getting into college so important and yet so difficult that kids are sacrificing their childhoods for it.
Then they become adults and it doesn't go away. Your employer/ potential employers are searching your social media and internet presence so you'd better hope no one has ever posted a picture of you at a party, or with alcohol, or wearing revealing clothes, or whatever else they've deemed unprofessional. And if you want to go out it's a 10 dollar cover and drinks are at least 8 dollars, and you need to tip if there's any kind of live entertainment, who can afford to do all that regularly?
My physical therapist, when I was 18, told me about his 21st birthday, how the last thing he remembers is people taking body shots off him. I spent my 21st birthday alone, was in bed by 10pm because I had to be at work the next morning. My boss had already told me that they knew it was my 21st, and if I called out, she'd write me up for improper use of sick leave because you're not allowed to use sick leave for a hangover. I don't know anyone whose 21st birthday was a big deal. No one went out and partied for it.
I dont really know where I'm going with all of this. I guess I just don't understand the point of it all. We spend our youth working hard to provide a future that we still can't afford. We have to be responsible and professional as teenagers. And we get nothing out of it. We can't afford life or friends or fun. At least our parents got to have fun being young and dumb, we just got groomed on kik.
So I'm not the only one noticing this. I wish I had an answer or at least something to say about it. But I dont. I'm just tired.
I kept the photo below for years, just in case one day I could find a good reason to use it as an illustration of what is going on withā¦
Original report (waybacked PDF) is from 2007. That's Gen Z kids.
When I, Gen-Xer, was about 12 - in my rural home, I had about a three-mile range. (Could've pushed it to more, but didn't want to walk that far.) In the city, it was about a mile. Not that anyone was checking; again, that was about the distance I wanted to walk, and besides, that covered all of "downtown."
My kids? Closer to that 300 yards limit at the same age. Not because I wanted to restrict them, but we live next to a freeway on-ramp and between two sets of train tracks... and there is absolutely nothing kid-friendly within a half-mile for them to visit.
I spent my 21st birthday bar-hopping. My kids spent their 21st birthdays at home with a nice meal. I don't think either of them wanted to go bar-hopping - but yeah, as a society, we've removed a LOT of teen-friendly options.
See also: End of Third Places, switch from video game arcades to home consoles (hey, then every kid has to buy their own copy--great for game-makers!), shutdown of malls or restrictions on youth at them, closure of public parks, reduced/removed after-school programs, etc. Plus the places that think it's illegal for a 12-year-old to walk to the corner store unsupervised.
I am, however, DELIGHTED to hear that the booze & other vices industries are panicking over Gen Z not going out to party. Like, you spent 30-odd years removing all the places and ways people can hang out together and have fun outside of someone's personal house, and... guess what, when people hit milestone events (graduation, milestone birthdays, job promotion, whatever), they don't immediately flock to the Party Zone that they have never been welcome at. How shocking.
It sucks that Gen Z does not get to party, does not have good celebration options. REALLY sucks that that's often because school or job has decided to tell them not to celebrate, rather than just not having places to go. I'm just not upset over party capitalism taking a hit.
I teach a lot of undergrads these days. About 3 years ago, I started dedicating a full two hours early every semester to a lecture and discussion about the history of the concept of plagiarism, because I was so annoyed that my students were walking into my classroom with the ironclad belief that they weren't plagiarizing when they were. Sure, the university had some official plagiarism guidelines that they could hypothetically read in a code of conduct somewhere, but they didn't. All they had was a vague memory of some teacher in Grade 8 telling them 'don't copy and paste from wikipedia' and a little learning from experience afterwards.
My hypothesis (which I was delighted to find is shared by Brian Deer, the journalist who broke the Wakefield story and who was the source Illuminaughti plagiarized in the hbomberguy video) is that the rise of automatic plagiarism checkers meant that, in the minds of many students, the formerly more abstract concept of plagiarism ('passing someone else's work off as your own') became a more concrete concept operationalized by the plagiarism checker. Under this concept, a text is plagiarized if (and, implicitly, only if) it is detected as plagiarism by the plagiarism checker. I have spent many hours with students sobbing in my office after I told them that their essays were plagiarized, and they all say that they thought changing the words around was sufficient to make it not plagiarized. Maybe some of them were lying for sympathy, maybe they all were, but I see no reason to not take them at their word. They think that what they're doing is dubious (hence the shame) but they don't think it falls under what they take to be the definition of plagiarism - the thing they can face sanction from the university for. They need to have it pointed out to them that there has been plagiarism for a lot longer than there have been automatic 'plagiarism checkers' and that as their professor, I'm the only plagiarism checker they really need to be concerned about.
It's really easy for me to get frustrated about this. It's frustrating to me that the American public high school system (the source of the majority of my students) has failed to prepare them to think about information, facts, and where they come from. It's frustrating that students can't be arsed to read the university's code of conduct and that the only way I know they have is if I read it straight to their faces. It's very frustrating to see the written scholarly word, a medium to which I have dedicated no small part of my life, treated like it's not worth anything. I'm frustrated to know that most students are not in my class, or in the class of someone else prepared to teach this lesson, so they'll go through their whole lives thinking that an uncited light paraphrase is enough to be worthy of credit. I'm frustrated that people with such a lax attitude towards information are my fellow voters. I once read a real fucking academic essay that was submitted for grades that cited a long quote from Arthur Conan Doyle that, when I traced it, was actually a quote from a fucking TJLC blog. That one isn't frustrating, I guess, that's just funny. It's not all bad.
I'm glad for the hbomberguy video. I hope it will make it easier to convince my students in future. It's too bad he didn't go into the academic context, but it's not like he was short on things to talk about already.
But this is a more general problem than just the video essay context shows. If we're not careful, the very concept of plagiarism can get eroded. I'm not a linguistic prescriptivist, either! If enough people start taking this new concept as plagiarism, that will be what it becomes. I think a world in which that notion of plagiarism is the relevant one would be a worse world. Don't let people erode the idea of credit. You're going to want it later.
@venus-light I hope you don't mind me responding to you here. I have no intention of killing you! And if I went around killing people for this kind of misunderstanding, I'd have to kill a lot of my students, which I suspect my employer would not like. This is a really common problem. I'm glad the video helped, and I too hope you're not the only person it helps.
It sounds like you have a much better grasp on this now, but I want to take this opportunity to expand on the point a bit. I'm home sick from work today and not in a position to do anything but read and write, so I'm going to write a bit about plagiarism in university essays, and what I think is the best way for an undergraduate to avoid it. I've addressed it to you, because you're the one who replied, but this is really for any undergraduate who happens to be reading it.
The common pitfall that people fall into when thinking of plagiarism is thinking of it as the violation of some discrete set of rules. Thou shalt cite thy sources. Thou shalt not copy and paste. Thou shalt format thy citations according to the divine command of the Chicago Manual of Style (17th Edition). Rules like that. Trouble is, that approach can only ever be so useful. There's a lot of contextual variation when it comes to the question of how much paraphrasing is appropriate - for instance, an assignment that's just asking you to summarize a particular text will have a lot of paraphrasing from one source in it, and that's not a problem. What will serve you better than specific rules is a more general heuristic.
Let's zoom out a bit and ask a larger question: what's the point of a college humanities essay? Why do we professors make students do them? It's certainly not for our benefit - they're difficult and time-consuming to grade - and we certainly know that students don't like them. It's not because we want to be informed of facts, or even because we want to make sure you have command of facts. In-class testing is a way more effective way to establish whether or not you have command of relevant facts, and it's also a much easier method to grade. So, an essay is doing something different.
The point of a college essay is to give you an opportunity to practice joining a scholarly discussion. We don't just want to see that you've read parts of the existing discussion, we want you to try to add your own voice to it. That's why professors will often ask for a minimum number of different sources in an essay - if you have to synthesize many voices and build them into a coherent body of text, you'll probably end up offering some authorial insight of your own along the way (in a way, this is what Somerton could have been doing, had he been less lazy. There is a real skill in synthesizing and comparing disparate sources!). Your job in an essay is not merely to use sources, but to judge them. If you find two sources that conflict, you get to explain which you think is in the right (if either). If you think two seemingly different perspectives can be put into productive dialogue with each other, you get to say so. And if you think that everyone you've read is wrong, actually, you absolutely get to say so. That's how academics treat each other, and that's the point of an essay. We want you to try to be a historian or a philosopher or a literary critic for a few days (yes, a few. I know you think you can do it in one. Everyone thinks that and everyone's wrong).
Often when I tell students this they respond with a kind of deference - after all, they're not experts, but the people they're reading presumably are. Who are they to judge? And that's true! Students are definitionally not experts. We're not expecting you to be. If you miss something that anyone who's gone through grad school would know about, that's fine. We know that's going to happen. It takes years in grad school to achieve mastery of the canon. It's okay to not already have expertise when we're trying to help you achieve it! Deference to expertise makes sense in other contexts, like when you're writing for the public, but it's not what is being asked of you in a university essay. Gaining expertise requires you to practice thinking like an expert - not just learning, but judging. Reading broadly in the relevant subject is vital, of course, but it's only half the battle. The other half comes from you. The university essay is a safe space to try to figure out what the part that comes from you sounds like.
This may be a surprise to hear, but I actually still remember quite a lot of specific student papers years after I graded them. And that's because I remember what specific students brought to their papers. I got to see them learning that they could intervene in a discussion - that they could bring their own judgement to the table. That their voice could matter. This is one of the great privileges of teaching.
It may feel like we've come a long way from plagiarism, but we haven't. Because this is why plagiarism in education actually matters. In assigning you an essay, I am handing you a microphone and asking what you want to say. I'm not interested in hearing what someone else has said. If you only give me a bunch of stuff paraphrased from elsewhere, there's a real sense in which you just haven't done the assignment, because you haven't said anything. That's the same problem that the youtube plagiarists have - in their rush to talk as much as possible, they say nothing. What does Illuminaughti actually think about Wakefield? What insight does a self-proclaimed Internet Historian have about the tragic tale of Floyd Collins? Somerton mashes up a tonne of different people's writing, but the different people think different things - who does he think is right? We don't know. They said nothing, and then deceived us into watching them say nothing. What a waste of time.
That's the heuristic. That's the thing that will help you avoid plagiarism in the future. Be proud of what you have to say, and don't miss the opportunity to say it! Indicate clearly where you're drawing on other people, not just for their benefit, but for yours - so that it's absolutely clear that your words are your own. You have thoughts worth hearing about, and this is one of the few times in life where you can be sure that at least one person is going to hear about them. And if you can look at your essay and know that it says what you wanted to say, then you don't need to worry about plagiarism anymore. You'll know it's yours.
If you've read this far, thank you for indulging me in my little speech. I hope the end of the semester treats you well, and good luck with your future studies.
I will write this thought about Veganism and Classism in the USA in another post so as to not derail the other thread:
There are comments in the notes that say meat is only cheaper than plant based foods because of subsidies artificially lowering the price of meat in the United States. This is...part of the story but not all of it.
For my animal agriculture lab we went to a butcher shop and watched the butcher cut up a pig into various cuts of meat. I have had to study quite a bit about the meat industry in that class. This has been the first time I fully realized how strongly the meat on a single animal is divided up by socioeconomic class.
Like yes, meat cumulatively takes more natural resources to create and thus should be more expensive, but once that animal is cut apart, it is divided up between rich and poor based on how good to eat the parts are. I was really shocked at watching this process and seeing just how clean and crisp an indicator of class this is.
Specifically, the types of meat I'm most familiar with are traditionally "waste" parts left over once the desirable parts are gone. For example, beef brisket is the dangly, floppy bit on the front of a cow's neck. Pork spareribs are the part of the ribcage that's barely got anything on it.
And that stuff is a tier above the "meat" that is most of what poor people eat: sausage, hot dogs, bologna, other heavily processed meat products that are essentially made up of all the scraps from the carcass that can't go into the "cuts" of meat. Where my mom comes from in North Carolina, you can buy "livermush" which is a processed meat product made up of a mixture of liver and a bunch of random body parts ground up and congealed together. There's also "head cheese" (made of parts of the pig's head) and pickled pigs' feet and chitlin's (that's made of intestines iirc) and cracklin's (basically crispy fried pig skin) and probably a bunch of stuff i'm forgetting. A lot of traditional Southern cooking uses basically scraps of animal ingredients to stretch across multiple meals, like putting pork fat in beans or saving bacon grease for gravy or the like.
So another dysfunctional thing about our food system, is that instead of people of each socioeconomic class eating a certain number of animals, every individual animal is basically divided up along class lines, with the poorest people eating the scraps no one else will eat (oftentimes heavily processed in a way that makes it incredibly unhealthy).
Even the 70% lean ground beef is made by injecting extra leftover fat back into the ground-up meat because the extra fat is undesirable on the "better" cuts. (Gross!)
I've made, or eaten, many a recipe where the only thing that makes it non-vegan is the chicken broth. Chicken broth, just leftover chicken bones and cartilage rendered and boiled down in water? How much is that "driving demand" for meat, when it's basically a byproduct?
That class really made me twist my brain around about the idea of abstaining from animal products as a way to deprive the industry of profits. Nobody eats "X number of cows, pigs, chickens in a lifetime" because depending on the socioeconomic class, they're eating different parts of the animal, splitting it with someone richer or poorer than they are. If a bunch of people who only ate processed meats anyway abstained, that wouldn't equal "saving" X number of animals, it would just mean the scraps and byproducts from a bunch of people's steaks or pork chops would have something different happen to them.
The other major relevant conclusion I got from that class, was that animal agriculture is so dominant because of monoculture. People think it's animal agriculture vs. plant agriculture (or plants used for human consumption vs. using them to feed livestock), but from capitalism's point of view, feeding animals corn is just another way to use corn to generate profits.
People think we could feed the world by using the grain fed to animals to feed humans, but...the grain fed to animals, is not actually a viable diet for the human population, because it's literally just corn and soybean. Like animal agriculture is used to give some semblance of variety to the consumer's diet in a system that is almost totally dominated by like 3 monocrops.
Do y'all have any idea how much of the American diet is just corn?!?! Corn starch, corn syrup, corn this, corn that, processed into the appearance of variety. And chickens and pigs are just another way to process corn. That's basically why we have them, because they can eat our corn. It's a total disaster.
And it's even worse because almost all the USA's plant foods that aren't the giant industrial monocrops maintained by pesticides and machines, are harvested and cared for by undocumented migrant workers that get abused and mistreated and can't say anything because their boss will tattle on them to ICE.
I swear to god though the part of that class was examining the various animal agriculture industries had me sitting there like I am turning into the joker
Small farmers have basically been obliterated by corporations. Over the last 50 years, 97% of pig farmers went under and their farms were bought out by corporations.
The textbook acted like the meat chicken industry was a great example of what other industries could do in the future and it was nightmare stuff. Like. In poultry, one corporation will own all the hatcheries, breeding farms, finishing facilities, slaughterhouses, that process millions and millions of chickens. One corporation.
There are literally less than 100 people in the United States that make all the decisions for how 99.9% of chickens are bred. The way the chicken breeds are, is controlled entirely by the corporations. And the chickens are all super inbred. They've inbred them intensely to make them grow as fast as possible with basically no other consideration, so they can get as big as possible to be slaughtered as young as possible, and they are basically fed nothing but corn and soybeans, despite chickens being omnivores.
That's the POINT of chickens being in your agricultural system, actually. They eat bugs, they eat plants, basically everything in their path, so you can have free pest control and fertilizer and get eggs and occasionally meat, but this system can't be exploited to squeeze out profit.
So it's like??? Their diet is just monocropped bullshit, and the meat is lower nutritional quality for us because they're basically just corn and soybeans with extra steps. I mean not really, they do convert it to different nutrients more useful for us, but it isn't the same benefit as eating chicken that actually has a normal varied diet.
And obviously the animals are getting treated like shit in these corporate owned warehouses and their genetics are so shit they can barely like, be a living creature properly. Like with the Cornish cross meat breeds, once they're like 3 months old, watching them move around (even in more ethical facilities that let them do so) is so sad because you can tell that they are really struggling to walk and hold themselves up because they're an inbred genetic nightmare made to grow so fast they can barely function. Because a few corporations are solely responsible for breeding them basically.
With pigs it's just as bad sustainability wise because the point of a pig is that they're basically a garbage disposal. They eat all your food waste, as well as foraging for themselves and for centuries they were bred to store it all as fat. The most important part of the pig was the lard, it was basically used like butter in baking and all sorts of stuff. The meat itself was packed in salt and cured and it would last for literal years without refrigeration or any fancy modern thing
Then there comes a notion that lard is Bad For You and you should eat Margarine Instead to be Healthy (which i think turned out to be...not even true???) and a bunch of pig breeds literally went extinct because there was a major anti-lard shift in the way they were eaten, and now we use pigs generically for meat and feed them a shit ton of corn and soybean to accomplish this, which totally contradicts all the actual reasons pigs were traditionally used in agricultural systems (eat food waste, store it as fat, produce lard that can be used to pad out the nutrition of everything you cook and cured meat that can last forever)
There is nothing sustainable about an agricultural system where everything has lost its relationship to everything else! UGHHHH
seeing people defend nz colonisation because āat least we werenāt violentā like fuck the schools really are failing us
yeah people seem to forget that The New Zealand Wars/The Land Wars lasted most of the 19th century???
or the New Zealand Settlements Act 1863, where land was confiscated from MÄori who rebelled against the government post-Jan 1863?? from a quick glance at the wiki for it:
Its stated purpose was to achieve the "permanent protection and security" of the country's inhabitants and establish law, order and peace by using areas within the confiscated land to establish settlements for colonisation, populated initially by military settlers enlisted from among gold miners at Otago and the Colony of Victoria (Australia). Land not used by for military settlers would be surveyed and laid out as towns and rural allotments and then sold, with the money raised to be used to repay the expenses of fighting MÄori.
I remember in school being so fucking furious, because we'd learn maori history in our half of the school and then have to watch the pakeha students do presentations about the treaty and never mention any of the bullshit between the versions. It would just be "Oh yes and then the treaty happened and it was all happy for everyone :)".
Most pakeha know more American history than Aotearoa history and way too few of them are willing to look into it; even the leftists. They're just "Oh new zealand is so much better than America/Australia :) aren't we good we did such a good job :)"
i was 15 when i actually got a class about the land wars following the treaty of waitangi. so many students were mind blown because they thought it was wars then treaty and everything is was fine.
that treaty that is famously a scam to fuck over maori sovereignty.
TIL that the reason lead levels in childrenās blood have dropped 85% in the past thirty years is because of an unknown scientist who fought car companies to end leaded gasoline. He also removed it from paint, suggested its removal from pipes, and campaigned for the removal of lead solder from cans.
via ift.tt
Yep.Ā It also correlates extremely strongly with an increasing decrease of violent crime.Ā One of the symptoms of low level constant lead exposure is increased aggression and volatility.Ā
āUnknown scientistā? That was Clair Cameron Patterson.
Gas companies are still so mad at him heās āunknown scientistā, know his name
Daily reminder that health and safety standards like these are what politicians mean when they talk about āderegulation.ā
Patterson died 5 December 1995.
Petition to make his date of death a Tumblr holiday celebrated by talking about cool shit the gas and petroleum industries donāt want us to know about, and fighting to continue his work.
Merry CCP Day!
Happy Clair Cameron Patterson day, and fuck the oil and gas industries
Andrey Surnov evening traffic 1 subway shipyard crane cranes evening traffic 2 evening traffic 3 night shop 1 6:00 AM shooting gallery dark street pizzeria night shop 2 red café
more art by Andrey Surnov
the cognitive dissonance from people who want the products of modern medicine but get weird about animal research. like im sorry but this is necessary for the survival of the society we currently live in. and the scientists who work on these things are not evil cackling psychopaths. anyone you talk to in animal research has incredibly complex feelings about their work and incredibly complex relationships to the animals in their care. there are regulations and oversight and penalties in place to make the work as humane as possible and scientists are overwhelmingly the ones enforcing and advocating for better care.
@velvetdemon I'm doing a full reply because I want to give this question the time and space it deserves, and I really do appreciate your curiosity about this.
The short answer: It is deeply unethical. There are nowhere near enough willing patients in the world to be able to do this, and it would be criminal to put them through this.
The long answer: The one side of the equation you're focusing on is: how much of a drug is too much, to the point where it will cause negative side effects or even death? And this is crucial to know. But it's not just a matter of finding out the lethal dosage of a heart cholesterol medication, you need to know that it can actually lower the cholesterol of any living thing. There is no way to know this without giving it first to...a living thing.
But beyond this, I need to emphasize: The goal of a drug trial is to effectively cure people who are already suffering from disease, who are living on limited time.
Drug trials don't just happen on any member of the public, they need to happen specifically on people affected by the disease you're trying to treat. There is at any time a very limited and very marginalized population of the world affected by early onset, familial Parkinson's disease. Because you cannot ethically induce disease in a human being, you are working with, speaking with, and helping patients and their families who are hopeful and desperate for a cure.
If you were to jump straight to human trials from petri dishes, not knowing absolutely anything about how the drug functions in a living, breathing animal body, it would look like this:
We didn't know that minute quantities of the drug interact lethally with x, y, z medication that people are commonly also taking. X number of patients have died as a result.
We didn't know that the drug is fatal to people with [common variant] in their genetics. X more patients have died.
We didn't know the drug exacerbates x, y, z chronic illnesses. X number of people have acquired permanent, lifelong disabilities.
We didn't know the best way to deliver the drug, so we tried multiple ways: the people who received it intravenously are now suffering from a painful, costly, and debilitating condition that did not happen with the ingested form.
I could go on, and on, and on.
The vast majority of these problems can be nearly or almost entirely averted by testing other animals first.
These are all people who possibly could have waited for the normal progression from animal testing to human testing and thus received better outcomes. Some people will pass away in the time it takes to get to that point, and that's heartbreaking, and we all wish science could be faster.
But the cost of expediting science could mean a life of profoundly greater suffering or an even shorter life than the one where no intervention happens at all. And at that point, you have completely exhausted your trust, your goodwill, and your patients' hope, after you've failed to do anything or even worsened the lives of people who are already deeply suffering.
hi, iām an animal research professional. making sure laboratory animals stay alive, healthy, and enriched has been my full-time job for several years now.
animal research is not the mad scientist wild west that PETA wants you to think it is. there are extremely strict federal laws in place to protect the well being of these animals. animal welfare organizations like AAALAC ensure that lab animals are treated with dignity & respect and are given enough specialized care & enrichment to be happy and content in captivity, just like AZA accreditation with zoos.
not a single animal from a zebrafish to a mouse to a dog to a macaque goes unaccounted for. if an animal gets moved to a new cage, paired for breeding, has a procedure performed on it, gives birth, gets sick or injured, dies, etc. it isĀ legally requiredĀ that this information is recorded and kept on file for the US federal government to access. failing to record & retain this information is very much punishable by US federal law.
let me tell you - if you abuse or kill an animal, even a mouse - you are almost certainly getting both fired & blacklisted from the industry. if you abuse or kill a more āadvancedā animal, such as a dog or monkey, you will likely face criminal charges. killing a monkey is as serious and disastrous as a nuclear meltdown. you are expected to reasonably explain every illness, injury, or death of an animal under your care. you must record all of this information. animals that are clearly suffering with low QOL are required to be euthanized according to AVMA guidelines.
research animals are highly expensive. yes, even the "lesser" animals like mice. the cheapest mice will run you a few hundred $ per individual, with some of the most expensive mice i've cared for being $25,000 per individual. in research we have the "three Rs" - reduction (reduce amount of necessary animals to a minimum), refinement (refine processes to ensure research is accurate and animals feel no pain or distress), and replacement (replace animals with non-living research models as they become available). i can assure you no proper research team is wasting animals (*do not* say "b-b-but elon musk--" his research team is actively being investigated for animal abuse by the government).
research methods that do not require live animals are currently being looked into & efforts spearheaded by - you guessed it - the animal research industry itself (notice how the animal rights people are strangely silent & unhelpful when it comes to this?) but current technology is rudimentary and does not compare to live animal models.
some research animal fun facts (US edition):
all species of animals are only allowed to have one single major surgery performed on them in their entire lifetime.
institutions with nonhuman primates must have a behavior program in place (run by knowledgeable primate specialists) to ensure that they are happy and receiving enough daily enrichment and social interaction.
institutions with dogs are required to have physical exercise programs in place. this means every individual dog gets a substantial amount of leashed AND free-roaming exercise daily, including playgroups with other dogs.
a majority of nonhuman primates get to retire to sanctuaries likeĀ peaceable primate sanctuary, and almost all dogs get retired and adopted out by organizations likeĀ homes for animal heroes. some institutions will also adopt out unneeded young rabbits, guinea pigs, rats, etc.
some strains of mice glow neon green (or orange or blue) under UV light. this is not harmful to them and is commonly seen in cancer research.
so yes, you can rest knowing that laboratory animals are treated with the utmost respect by their caretakers. and you can stop this awful, ignorant talk of human experimentation that will only end in the abuse of nonwhite people, LGBT people, disabled people, indigenous people, and so many others. please just take a look atĀ this wikipedia pageĀ if you think āethicalā human experimentation can exist.
Listen, y'all. In my home county, there was a dude with cancer--a longtime radio deejay, John Kanzius. (Yes, I just violated a major rule of internet security by telling you this. I don't live there anymore or we wouldn't have names on this post.)
He threw himself into cancer research because traditional methods weren't working--they were just making him sicker. That's not to say "oh nooooooo, Big Pharma wants you sick," it's to say that chemo is no walk in the park, and for some people the cure can be worse than the disease. So he read an absolutely insane amount of cancer research, taught himself, and invented a way to treat cancer with radio waves. His cancer went terminal. He begged for the chance to test the treatment on himself. As he put it, he was going to die anyway--if it killed him quicker, so be it. And if it gave him a few more years, a few more months, a few more days, well....they'd have their Patient Zero to show it was safe to go into clinical trials. The research team said no. And they said no because even though it'd successfully killed cancer cells in petri-dish testing, it hadn't gone through requisite animal testing yet. Everything researchers stated above? True. Correct. They will not put a human at risk, even a dying human, even a dead man walking, until they know the risk is minimal. John Kanzius died in 2009. Want to know when first-in-human trials started? July of 2021. That should tell you a lot about how human experimentation is viewed in medicine. He--and others who'd heard him mistakenly claim he'd "cured cancer" before he understood just how much research still needed to be done--was ready to die for the chance to live. People offered to sign every waiver, release every legal liability. And the answer was still no. Because without seeing how his treatment would work on an actual living being as opposed to just some cells in a dish, there was too much chance someone could spend their final days in unspeakable agony if things went wrong. And unlike a mouse, you can't provide compassionate euthanasia to a human. It's illegal. Yes, even if there's 0% chance of recovery. (Look up Jack Kevorkian if you want a bit of understanding as to why.) There is a reason animal testing exists. I'm not a fan of it. I wish it didn't have to be a thing. I also recognize that if we want to successfully research a lot of cutting-edge medicine, it has to be a thing. It is possible to hold both of those positions at once.
i mean all of this but like. they very much have 'just done human trials' like i understand where you think you're coming from tumblr user velvetdemon and others with that perspective but that was a pretty significant thing that has happened. multiple times. and almost every single time it was a case of horrific abuse of vulnerable populations. they very much have done human-only trials.
I present for your consideration, some of the human trials they 'just did':
Nutrition experiments carried out on Canadian Aboriginal children in residential schools between 1942 and 1952, in which various control and experimental groups were deliberately malnourished. Also the Qu'Appelle BCG vaccine trial.
Basically everything the Australian government has done to the Aboriginal people, but especially experiments in the 20s and 30s, which tested basal metabolism by forcing subjects to lie still and breath through a rubber tube for hours, or those testing their response to pain.
Testing of a new antibiotic* on children in Kano, Nigeria, during a meningococcal meningitis outbreak, by Pfizer. The lawsuit the families and the Nigerian government brought against Pfizer also alleged that this further reduced the public's trust in vaccines and contributed to poor uptake of the polio vaccine.
The Tuskeegee Syphillis Study, which is a landmark in medical ethics fuckery that everyone should know about. The US has also carried out variations of this in so many places
Southam's experiments on prisoners using HeLa cancer cells** without their informed consent.
The Rawalpindi experiments carried out on members of the British Indian army to test mustard gas.
I'm not even going to talk about the Nazi ones.
*In this case they actually did do animal trials beforehand, which contraindicated its use in children, but I included this because it demonstrates how unethical research practice can impact public health.
**HeLa cells in themselves are also a colossal fuckup of informed consent!
I've survived my first day on Tumblr
Achievements:
Don't shoot! I'm friendly!: Prove you're not a bot
AI dismemberment: Disable algorithm settings
Friends?: Gained a mutual
I recognize you: Follow someone you know from r/Tumblr
MY EYES!: Change the site palette
Great Idea: Reblog a post
They love me: Have a post reblogged
Oh boy oh boy you're gonna get a Rare achievement for this one
Containment Breach
I've been inundated with over 120 new followers in the last 5 hours. I haven't been able to even check if I have any pornbots. I'm tired and need to go to bed. I'll clean up this mess tomorrow.
This is cool to look at, though. I'm studying some data-science adjacent fields so things like this are fascinating to me.
I've been told I should submit this to world-heritage-posts. Just to make it clear what happened to me, here's a screenshot of my notifications activity in the last 24 hours.
For additional context, I've only been here 4 days.
At his point, I've been here 5 days and this post has 85k+ notes. My notifications have recovered to the point that sometimes they're empty so I'd say the breach has been recontained and now I just need to deal with the cleanup process.
I figure it might be interesting to show just what this experience has been like.
This is my notification history over the last week. I joined Tumblr Saturday June 17th, 2023 around 12pm so the actual data starts half way through the chart. My follower count has grown at a roughly equal pace.
Overall, I enjoyed the whole thing once the shock died down. I was just surprised this was the post that would gain any traction at all. I expected the chicken posts would be the first ones to reach triple digits and only several months later. But I've enjoyed reading peoples' reactions and chatting with folks here.
I'll close out by sharing some other achievements I've gotten since:
It's free to give: Like a post
It's great to receive: Have a post be liked
This calls for a specialist: Install a third-party app
Precautionary measure: Disable email notifications
Uh-oh: Have a post reach 100 notes
Oh no: Have a post reach 1k notes
PLEASE NO!!: Have a post reach 30k notes
CONTAINMENT BREACH: Have a post spread across Tumblr
Fallout: Have at least three posts reach 500 notes during a containment breach
Blessings(?) of the gods: Have a post reblogged by a member of Tumblr staff
At this point, it's all white noise: Open your notifications when it's at 99+ and receive 99+ notifications in less than a second
And blocked: Receive hate mail
Also blocked: Receive a creepy DM
To the scrapyard with you!: Report a pornbot
Shiny scrap: Report a male pornbot
Maybe you should have thought ahead: Use the Mass Post Editor to add a tag to 20 posts
Next time, proofread before you post: Use the Mass Post Editor to edit a tag on 20 posts
Wild creature at the zoo: Find a heritage post using the search engine
It's raining cats and cats!: Receive 30 cat pictures
True human experience: Receive a message that makes you feel genuinely loved
And with this, I'm going to call this chapter of the Saga of Containment Breach closed
this new reblog chart feature is FASCINATING and it is also highlighting how much people on this website fail gifmakers and other content creators. you NEED to start reblogging gifsets and art if you want this site to continue functioning and being a place content creators WANT to be on. look at this
there are almost NO reblog chains!! the majority of reblogs are directly from me, and then it just. ends. the like to reblog ratio is almost 1:4.
this is why posts die. this is why artists have left, this is why gifmakers are giving up. this is killing tumblr.
reblogging is the ENTIRE POINT of this website, and you can't just like something and move on and expect gif/editmakers and artists to continue putting in the effort to make content FOR YOU.
REBLOG. POSTS.
look at this one !!! its so cool
REBLOG POSTS
Tweet
What the fuck
This is absolutely fascinating. I've now been looking at Alex Colville's paintings and trying to work out what it is about them that makes them look like CGI and how/why he did that in a world where CGI didn't exist yet. Here's what I've got so far:
- Total lack of atmospheric perspective (things don't fade into the distance)
- Very realistic shading but no or only very faint shadows cast by ambient light.
- Limited interaction between objects and environment (shadows, ripples etc)
- Flat textures and consistent lighting used for backgrounds that would usually show a lot of variation in lighting, colour and texture
- Bodies apparently modelled piece by piece rather than drawn from life, and in a very stiff way so that the bodies show the pose but don't communicate the body language that would usually go with it. They look like dolls.
- Odd composition that cuts off parts that would usually be considered important (like the person's head in the snowy driving scene)
- Very precise drawing of structures and perspective combined with all the simplistic elements I've already listed. In other words, details in the "wrong" places.
What's fascinating about this is that in early or bad CGI, these things come from the fact that the machine is modelling very precisely the shapes and perspectives and colours, but missing out on some parts that are difficult to render (shadows, atmospheric perspective) and being completely unable to pose bodies in such a way as to convey emotion or body language.
But Colville wasn't a computer, so he did these same things *on purpose*. For some reason he was *aiming* for that precise-but-all-wrong look. I mean, mission accomplished! The question in my mind is, did he do this because he was trying to make the pictures unsettling and alienating, or because in some way, this was how he actually saw the world?
Colville was part of the Magic Realism movement (the art term was invented by Franz Roh in 1925). The basic idea of Magic realism is to blend realism (scenes from every-day life painted in a naturalistic manner) with with the surreal to create a dream-like image. So we get these strange paintings with compositions like a quick snap-shot and details that are at times almost hyper-realistic (like the control panel in the car) merged with flat colors and lightning, etc. and the effect is as uncanny as those old/bad CGI effects.