No title available
Discoholic šŖ©
Today's Document
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
noise dept.
No title available
if i look back, i am lost
Xuebing Du
h
Show & Tell
One Nice Bug Per Day
Stranger Things
gracie abrams
RMH
Cosmic Funnies
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
š
ellievsbear
#extradirty
Mike Driver
seen from Canada
seen from France
seen from Singapore
seen from TĆ¼rkiye
seen from Singapore
seen from Algeria
seen from Indonesia
seen from New Zealand
seen from Morocco
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Italy
seen from Indonesia
seen from Brazil
seen from Canada
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Venezuela
@wyhmiis
So as an Antarctic expert I need to add to this that we had not in fact been to Antarctica when it was named. The ancient Greeks decided that because there was an Arctic at the top of the world, with bears, there had to be an opposite at the other end, without bears. Which is kind of ridiculous except that the fuckers were dead on
as an archivist I am begging you
put dates on everything
donāt believe digital stuff is preserved forever - if itās really important (documents, photos, etc) print it out
name your files accurately I know it sucks but please
donāt destroy the original just bc you scanned it
rubber cement is the devilās adhesive use photo corners and quit gluing shit
you will NOT remember write it down
if you staple things to the inside of a folder I will find you
your public library probably has equipment to digitize old media for free or can at least get you connected with somewhere that does!
a roasted brussel sprout can change your life if you let it. open your heart. take my hand. its good, try it. i love a brusseled sprout I love you
kinda feel bad for millennials who donāt know that Harry Potter is almost a hate symbol now. Imagine that happening to any other beloved childhood media
How do people not know?
a lot of millennials know only the bare surface level of it (jkr = transphobe = bad) but dont really know much further than that so theyre like Okay so its fine if you just pirate the books and dont buy merch! Its fine! Im still a ravenclaw though!
This is already over and I'm not Directly involved* but I also think it's prob important to mention that the full extend of JK Rowling's transphobia is really often EXTREMELY downplayed. Transphobia is a form of bigotry not treated with a lot of seriousness and very flagrant and often violent displays of transphobia are seen as "acceptable" or "normal" by enough people (moreso than a lot of other forms of bigotry I would argue; I seriously think "famous children's book author thinks homosexuality is a mental illness on par with pedophilia" would be treated WAY more seriously than "famous children's book author thinks transgenderism is a mental illness on par with pedophilia" because most people literally do think being trans is a mental illness) for JKR's transphobia to be reported on mostly as "the trans community Disagrees with some of JK Rowling's statements" in its most neutral state and "can you believe the crazy pronoun mob is trying to CANCEL Harry Potter just because of a GENERATIONAL DIVIDE?" in its most nefarious. The idea that JK Rowling "just said a few things wrong and didn't use totally up-to-date language" is STILL how most cis gays especially above a certain age think about "the JK Rowling drama". The actual reality, which is that JK Rowling has spent years and years of her life not only donating to anti-trans orgs, not only publishing thinkpieces about irreversible damage and tomboy extinction and rapists in women's bathrooms, but spending basically every day on Twitter arguing with pro-trans tweets with literally three views (not likes, views), just is not reported on by mainstream media outlets. Cis people continue to treat "the JK Rowling discourse" as crazy triggered snowflakes blowing a few out-of-context comments made years ago out of proportion because they hate Harry Potter/women/family values/etc., and not more akin to the "Kanye West said he loves Hitler and somehow basically nothing has happened to his career" type situation it actually is. I just don't know how "canceled" someone really is if they still own a fucking theme park. I feel confident in saying that there is not a single trans person on this Earth who is as influential and successful as JK Rowling continues to be.
TL;DR millennials and older still manage to "not know" about JK Rowling (and by extension Harry Potter, because unlike most other "canceled authors" JK Rowling has outright said that she considers any and all mildly positive engagement with her work to be a signal of support of her ideas about trans people; I need to emphasize that this is Not Common and also not the actions of someone who got taken out of context by the crazy woke mob) because transphobia is so undervalued as an actual serious force of bigotry that mainstream media does not report on JK Rowling as a very serious and devoted bigot, in perhaps the most extreme example of "only trans people are expected to care about and notice that this is happening"
You can adapt to being Socially Weird by getting into consciously analyzing your interactions like Mind Chess, but watch out: this makes it worse
listening to an album you used to love but overplayed for yourself after a really long time after the overplayedness has worn off and it sounds like it's supposed to again is the closest to being in heaven you can get during your mortal life i think
I don't always get pissed off when people say they hate men because I feel like it's a very situational thing. If you get stung by bees 5 times in a row or are dealing with a bee who's being a dickhead and say I HATE BEES I'd understand that fully, and if someone called you anti-environmentalist for that it would be poorly timed at best and policing language at worst. However if we're discussing the environment at a convention with a bunch of pollinators, including those whose happiness relies on being a bee, and you interject with "why don't we just kill all bees, problem solved lol" then I don't know how to tell you that is not the right time for this
one of The Many problems with how the general public conceptualizes addiction and recovery is that "rock bottom" makes a really good narrative beat, it's a nice and dramatic second act low point in your classic three act structure to give a character something to make them reevaluate and get their life in order, and the human brain sure likes holding on to Fun Narratives, so even well-intentioned people who don't consider themselves to believe in punitive measures get it stuck into their heads that thee way that people get sober is by experiencing some kind of reckoning of harsh consequences (losing a job or home, overdosing, being rejected by loved ones, getting desperate and feeling driven to do something really awful to keep using, etc). when, if you think about it for like two seconds, basically no one in the world is going to juuust about survive their own personal worst case scenario and think "wow, now would be a really great time to give up my only coping mechanism and voluntarily induce a medical emergency for the next several weeks," that kind of thing is far more likely to just immediately make everything Much worse.
I once saw a parenting blog or something that was written with a very earnest and measured tone seriously give the advice "if your teen is struggling with addiction and won't respond to anything you do then your best move would be to kick them out and cut them off so they run out of other options more quickly" and I just sat there in a kind of mute horror for a few minutes afterwards. like. no that's actually how you kill people. if a child is already in the midst of a mental health crisis, and you then deliberately engineer the situation to give them a second crisis, that is how you kill someone. I cannot stress this enough.
basically:
To expect an addict to give up her drug is like asking the average person to imagine living without all his social skills, support networks, emotional stability, and sense of physical and psychological comfort. Those are the qualities that drugs, in their illusory and evanescent way, give the addict. People like Serena and Celia and the others whose portraits have appeared in this book perceive their drugs as their ārock and salvation.āĀ Thus, for all the valid reasons we have for wanting the addict to ājust say no,ā we first need to offer her something to which she can say āyes.ā We must provide that island of relief. We have to demonstrate that esteem, acceptance, love, and humane interaction are realities in this world, contrary to what the addict has learned all his life. It is impossible to create that island for people unless they can feel secure that their substance dependency will be satisfied as long as they need it.
gabor matƩ, "chapter 27: toward an enlightened social policy on drugs," in the realm of hungry ghosts
we are all familiar with flanderization but allow me to introduce the opposite: blanderization, in which the character's most distinctive or controversial traits are downplayed or removed to make them more palatable
something i have always found really weird is when english texts italicize words from other languages.
i remember reading a book as a kid and the author continually italicizing the word tamales
official linguistics post
bring back shame
peer reviewed tags
if iām ever brutally murdered and everyone feels like they need to do something productive in my memory, all i want is for you to pass legislation banning LED headlights in my name. regardless of how irrelevant it is to my murder. itās relevant to my heart.
tumblr users, overall, have low financial literacy. and like, I get it. itās not shocking that a majority user base of chronically broke-adjacent people are intimidated by and/or think itās useless to learn about financial systems. Iām not surprised by this. but I do think itās really really important to have an understanding of business and financial concepts, even when itās dense and scary, because itās fundamental to how the modern world works. this post is inspired by the notes on this post about the idea of bankification and is for an american audience.
when you deposit a paycheck in a traditional bank account, you go online and see the number in your balance. to you, it looks like there is a single account that quarantines your money away from everybody elseās. you may think that when you deposit money in the bank, the bank is just holding that money for you, but actually, by depositing money is a bank, you are lending the bank company your money.
a bank companyās core function is to make money by bundling together the deposits that many customers have lent it, and investing that money in the stock market. the bankās investments earn interest, which is the bankās profit. if you have a savings account, youāre essentially telling the bank āhey, I plan to have this money sitting here for a while without drawing on it.ā a savings account is a more stable investment base than a checking account for the bank, which is why the company incentivizes you to have one. when you earn interest on a savings account, that is the bank giving you a tiny kickback of the money they are making through investing your (and othersā blended) deposits.
the traditional banking system is insured by the federal deposit insurance corporation (FDIC), which is a government agency. if you took all your money out of the bank and hid it under your mattress, if somebody broke into your house and stole it, you will lose all your money. but the government insures money in traditional banks, usually up to $250,000 per consumer account. this means that even if the bank companyās investments all fail and the bank company loses all your cash, the government will bail the bank out, and you will not lose your money.
by putting your money in a traditional bank, you ensure your money is protected, you get a small kickback of interest, and you get access to the convenience of the bankās online platform to track your finances. you also get a debit card to easily make purchases by drawing directly from your accounts. for the bank company, they get billions of dollars of interest-free loans, in the form of their customerās deposits, to invest in the stock market. at its core, ignoring fees and credit cards and mortgages, this is how the banking system works.
bankification is the idea that non-banking companies are trying to operate like banks. this includes tech companies like Apple offering credit cards, but an aspect of bankification that is less understood is companies incentivizing consumers to give them interest-free loans. while banks are regulated by the government in exactly when and how they can operate within this business model, other companies trying to profit through this model are not always beholden to these regulations because their activities are not technically considered banking. letās look at an example: loyalty programs.
in 2025, starbucks has an estimated $2 billion in deferred revenue from their loyalty program. deferred revenue is like a gift card; the company receives money because the customer paid up-front for the gift card, but the company is beholden to discount a future purchase by the pre-paid amount. there are multiple advantages to receiving deferred revenue for a company.
when a customer loads money onto their starbucks loyalty account, they are essentially buying a digital gift card. remember how banks encourage consumers to put money into savings accounts because it is a long-term holding account, which makes it a more stable investment base? once you buy a gift card, you cannot convert it back into cash. the money cannot leave the company, making a very stable investment base. starbucks offers a lot of benefits and discounts for customers who load money onto their loyalty accounts because starbucks recognizes the value of a captive investment base of interest-free loans. when many customers prepay through the loyalty program, starbucks is using that pooled money the same way a bank does: investing it to make even more money.
as a side note, two other major advantages of this gift card model for companies is inflation and breakage. money loses value over time through inflation. when you buy a gift card, you pay the money upfront, and the company can invest that money sooner at its higher value. breakage is the idea that if a gift card is bought but never redeemed, then the company essentially got money for nothing.
now, does this bankification through loyalty programs directly hurt consumers? well, not really. consumers who participate in these sorts of loyalty programs get benefits like discounts. the problem is indirect harms: that this money is uninsured for the consumer, and the deferred revenue investment base is less regulated than traditional banks.
if starbucksā investments failed and the company died, any money those customers had paid into the loyalty program but had not yet used on purchases would disappear. the money is not insured, so the customer wouldnāt get it back. the same is true for keeping your money in any non-FDIC insured company, including companies like PayPal and Cashapp*. (*some services from those platforms, usually the credit cards, are insured because they have a backing partner bank. but a sitting balance in a free account is usually not FDIC-insured. donāt leave your money sitting in these accounts.)
because companies investing their deferred revenue is regulated and taxed differently than traditional banksā investments, not only if there less protection for the consumer, but there is less protection for the wider economy. If a bankified company with significant investments into other bankified company fails, this can cause a shockwave effect similar to the 2008-9 financial crisis wherein all the interconnected bankified companies are destabilized. banks are heavily regulated to avoid that happening again, but bankified companies are not beholden to that legislation.
just cause itās worth a mention, the predatory opposite-twin of the loyalty-program type bankification is buy-now pay-later bankification. buy now pay later is a more approachable way of saying financing. a mortgage is a type of financing; the bank pays for your house up-front, and you need to repay them over a period of years with interest and potential fees. again, traditional banks are heavily regulated in what they can do with financing. bankified companies offer financing on their purchases because they arenāt beholden to the same strict regulation, and they can set the time period, fees, and interest on their financing to whatever they want. bankified financing is often much more directly predatory to the consumer.
there is no hairstyle that beats the humble braid. while the ponytail often causes headaches, and the half-pony sometimes doesnāt keep all of the hair away from oneās face, the braid looks cute and allows one to rest their head on the back of a chair. while the hair is braided, one may look either like a shojo protagonist, a medieval princess, or a quaint shepherdess. the added bonus of having mermaid waves afterwards is the cherry on top.
"They were a good person with good intentions and strong convictions and belief in doing the right thing. And because of that they deeply hurt people including people they were trying to protect" - is fantastic characterisation that too many people reduce to only one half of the equation
"They were a good person and people still died because they didn't put trust in anyone else" ā is so fucking good but people don't fucking appreciate it
"They were a good person and they failed. Over and over again. They failed." ā DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND HOW DELICIOUS THAT IS!?!?
I am on my hands and knees begging people to allow characters to be complex and flawed and not reduced down to "The Good Guy" and "The Bad Guy"
practicing radical acceptance about the fact that I'm always gonna be weird and awkward and a little difficult to be around. it's okayyyy to be weird as hell
so today a public health official guy came into my class to give a lecture on disaster awareness and he was talking about house fires and mentioned that the reason people most likely die during a house fire is because they refuse to leave their pet inside or they go back to get their pet. and right when he said this my friend immediately turned his head and looked at me and in that moment I had the most complete and genuine acceptance take over my body. I would 100% in front of my family and Jesus himself walk straight back into some raging inferno that was once my house to go get my fat cat. I nodded back
the best part of this post is reading all the tags from animal people who would also go back to save their pets. like no hesitation. walk backwards from heaven straight back into hell. someone even said they would go back for their fish. amazing
If you are a person who would walk into a blazing inferno for your animal, and your pet has free movement around the house, hereās a training exercise that could help save you both:
1) Set off your smoke alarm or play the sound on your phone (if your home has no smoke alarms, pease get some!)
2) stand BY THE FRONT DOOR to hand out treats
Do this a couple times and then keep it up NO EXCEPTIONS. Accidentally set the alarm off cooking? Treats by the door. Smoke alarm sound on TV? Treats by the door. Changing your smoke alarm batteries twice a year like youāre supposed to? Give them a test run and your pets get treats by the door.
Most dogs and cats will clue in VERY quickly that hearing that specific sound means go to the front door and wait for treats.
If thereās an emergency and even if you leave by another way, you will still know the most likely place your pet(s) is and can direct first responders to help.
You can also do this for any other kind of emergency alarm. My friend had both her cats trained to go to the front door for a tsunami siren.
