I am in awe of this.
Something in my brain always registered Mars as seen in media. Like dark, little sunlight and like an orange colour. To see it actually look like earth.. like something familiar… is amazing to me.
look, I know it’s ~problematic~ for all kinds of reasons but I do kind of love when there’s a character with few or no scruples who outsources their moral compass to someone else
it’s sort of the equivalent of when a cat jumps up somewhere they shouldn’t be and you just pick them up and move them off it, only with murder or whatever.
character a looking at character b like “okay is this a situation where I can do a murder” and character b like. “no. we’ve gone over this.”
I just find it very funny
Just a regular morning in Normandy..
(Oh, and Legion and EDI found that one specific Disney/Pixar’s robot animation, Wall-E delightful. They really do enjoy the song Put on your Sunday clothes (orig from Hello, Dolly!)
Mass Effect by Bioware
Comic & art made by me
Why did “be critical of your media” turn into “find all its flaws and hate it” why did people become allergic to FUN
Because people confuse “critical as in critical thinking” with “critical as in criticizing something,” so they think that “look for something bad, no matter how far-fetched” is what “being critical” means.
They also don’t realize that “literary criticism” means…
Okay. What literary criticism IS, is like taking a mechanical clock apart to see all the gears and learn how it fits together and approach your next clock with more knowledge of what makes it tick.
What they THINK literary criticism means is, you take the clock apart and beat all the pieces with a hammer, then scream at it because it doesn’t tick for you the way it used to.
OMG SOMEBODY PUT IT IN WORDS
asked my friend why the @ symbol is called (spider) monkey in german and polish and they sent me this drawing
Klammeraffe, yes, but not spider monkey in German. Not many people call it that anymore, though, and definitely not when you spell out your email address :).
@riptidemonzarc Vielleicht kennst du diesen Begriff noch nicht… 😊
Nein, gar nicht. Wie heißt es, wenn man die E-Mail-Adresse aussagt?
vegans who refuse to even eat backyard eggs….why
people who think its unethical to eat chicken eggs are like people who think bees should keep all their honey. they literally produce more than they need and your unwillingness to even buy local means you are doing nothing to help them, support your small farmers you heathens
This is not true.
1) honeybees do not produce “extra honey.” And beekeepers don’t take some of the honey, they take all of it.
2) chickens have been artificially selected from naturally producing eggs once a month to producing eggs every couple of days. Their bodies are not sustainable and the health complications of this rapid egg production kills chickens.
Hey idk who like. Lied to you about the way honey farms work, but could you stop spreading misinformation? Are you a beekeeper?
Because I am!
Beekeepers make sure hives are fed before there is pollen in the air, protected from predators and the elements, and have enough honey to sustain themselves. We don’t take all of it.
But overproduction of honey leads to stagnation in the hive. It puts stress on the queen to lay eggs, and when they inevitably fill up all their space with honey (instead of filling up the multiple empty, clean boxes of frames beekeepers might put on top of the main hive box), the queen can get so stressed she dies. If there’s a spike in the weather and the hive hasn’t prepared new queen brood, that’s it! The colony is dead. Because there wasn’t enough space for eggs and honey in the hive.
Beekeepers take excess honey. We are constantly monitoring the state of the hive, checking for parasites, analyzing the eggs for diseases, and making sure they are fed and healthy (usually with sugar water and pollen substitutes until they have made enough honey to sustain themselves in the early spring months). If a queen dies prematurely, we make every attempt to replace her to save the colony.
I know there’s an urge to patronize everyone who works in the farming industry, but try to understand the differences between small scale agriculture and industrial farming. There IS a difference. And stop spreading misinformation.
If you’re this passionate about ethical consumption, look into some of the ecofeminist research on non-hierarchal interspecies relationships (working on building animal-human relationships in a non exploitative way).
But yeah! Stop spreading misinformation! Please 🐝
Also if I can harp on the chicken part?
Yea Chickens are some of the most abused animals on big factory farms and I’ll be the first to admit it’s criminal and more needs to be done to regulate this.
Yes selective breeding over time has caused an increase in the ammount of eggs produced by chickens and factory farms have some messed up practices to get more eggs from them including forced moutling.
THIS IS WHY YOU SUPPORT LOCAL FARMERS AND THEIR EGGS
Many people take to raising their own hens because of America’s immoral treatment of hens in factory farms like you’re not helping the poor chicks by starving these farmers financially you’re just hurting the one people trying to change things and making the OPTION of cage free organic cruelty free eggs even harder to find
First of all, chickens didn’t ever “lay one egg a month” because they’re clutch layers. Not only that, but many chicken folk are raising heritage breeds, not commercial hens,. Your average commercial production hen (leghorns, Isa browns, etc) produce 5-6 eggs per week, laying an egg a day (which is actually how junglefowl, ie wild chickens, lay. The difference is that jungle fowl lay their clutch and then brood). Heritage breeds often don’t because they haven’t been bred for egg production, they’ve been bred out of a sense of heritage. Older breeds our ancestors around the world kept for various reasons. Often these breeds are the ones that lay 3-4 eggs in a week instead of daily, which is less often than wild fowl when it’s laying season. In addition, several heritage breeds are being kept for conservation reasons, as the breeds were nearly lost.
And backyard hens are often spoiled pets. They get fed rich, hearty, varied diets. Usually a staple chow and then extras like leafy greens, bugs, fruits, veggies. Often they get table scraps. I’ve seen countless people make warm oatmeal on cold mornings to give to Their Ladies. They make them chicken sweaters, and aprons, and diapers so they can visit inside the house for snuggles. Enrichment is increasing for them every day. Most people allow their birds to free range during the day when it’s nice out. They give them names.
They also lay eggs, often infertile ones but even the fertile ones aren’t “babies” like you’re thinking. They are absolutely inert without incubation for over 24 hours straight because chickens lay a clutch of 8-15 eggs and need them to hatch at all the same time so they don’t start incubation until the hen stops laying and sits on them. Brooding is just as hard if not harder on them than laying is, because they stop eating and drinking except once a day, and hold in their poop so they only poop once a day instead of eliminating waste every 15 minutes or so like they would normally. This can cause them to lose a lot of weight and some birds will sit on eggs until it seriously threatens their health. So normally you don’t WANT them to brood if you can prevent it, unless you know they have fertile eggs AND you want babies or know how you’re going to re-home them. It’s also not possible to safely fix a bird; anesthesia is an extremely dangerous risk that often leads to death and no vet in their right mind would risk it just so you can prevent a chicken hen from laying eggs.
IN SUMMARY: The eggs they naturally produce by existing and being well cared for are edible, nutritious, and taste good, you cannot safely prevent them from laying them, and leaving the eggs in with them can lead to negative health consequences.
So what would you have someone do? Throw away food just because your pet produced it instead of the dirt? That’s illogical and wasteful.
Like, if you just don’t want to eat eggs, then don’t. I don’t particularly like eggs either! I keep chickens as pets, and they produce a bunch of eggs I don’t eat, so I sell them or give them to other people. BUT if you’re not eating eggs from backyard chickens because of some misguided idea that it’s cruel, you’re just wrong, and you should stop spreading that lie.
sometimes I look at posts like this and think “surely this is a false flag. nobody who champions a cause is that uninformed about it, right? RIGHT? surely this is somebody pretending to be a vegan/ARA to set up a “look at the vegan getting completely owned” post.”
then i go to their blogs and (when they’re not deactivated because of the vegan getting completely owned post) oh my god they are real, they just don’t actually know anything about the thing they hate. they have no idea how beekeeping, small-scale chickenkeeping, or anything in the animal ag industry actually works. they’ve completely bought into the lie that small-scale production is just as bad for animals and the environment as factory farming.
Either we have a bunch of small farms and personal/community gardens where people produce substantial portions of their own food, we have giant factory farms, or most of us die of starvation.
To be fair, post-it notes are generally safe enough.
The point of a strong set of computer passwords is to keep your accounts safe from hackers, not burglars.
In the Linux world there is a concept along the lines of “presence takes precedence”; i.e., if you’ve got physical access to the machine, it’s yours, and indeed, if you’re halfway determined and can google effectively on a separate device, you can bypass the password to a Linux computer you have right in front of you. With a bit more googling, you can gain root access and do pretty much anything you want. The flipside is that Linux servers are *very* difficult to hack into remotely, to the point that a significant portion of the Internet runs on Linux machines.
This concept is similar to that of password managers, like Dashlane or LastPass. I prefer Keepass myself, which is a bit more cumbersome than the other two, but it’s open-source and doesn’t store any passwords remotely, so you’re not relying on the security of strangers.
But any way you like it, a password manager (even letting Google manage your passwords) is better than having to keep track of a million different accounts yourself. Let the program generate a long string of nonsense for you, and you don’t even ever have to see it. Then you just need one decent password *for the password manager*, and occasionally change the generated passwords if you have reason to suspect they’ve been compromised.
I do believe that fiction writers have some responsibility not to spread toxic messages. That’s why I was so critical of Fifty Shades of Grey - while I believe it is okay (and sometimes important) to depict unethical relationships, there should be some acknowledgement as such in the text, and some realistic effects on the participants. Similar to how it’s okay to depict racism in fiction, but it’s not okay to depict racist stereotypes as being correct.
HOWEVER. This basic principle has gotten way out of hand in some fanfiction subcultures. So here’s some big ol’ caveats to the basic principle of “don’t write women falling in love with their rapists”:
1. An author’s responsibility is proportionate to their reach. If your book is a bestseller and has movies based on it and licensed tie-in sex toys, you should be subject to roughly a billion times more scrutiny than a 19-year-old who wrote an AO3 fic with 8 kudos. Not that the fic can’t be criticized at all, but people should be gentler and keep some sense of perspective.
2. Characters are allowed to be wrong and unethical. That’s kind of an important thing in fiction. Characters are allowed to be unreliable narrators. If an evil character says “my abuse victim loves it,” that is not Problematic, it’s realistic. If the abuse victim says “I love it,” that is touchier but can be handled seriously. If the narrative says “she loved it,” then you have a bona fide Problem.
3. Teenagers have been horny, talked about sex, and had sex with each other since the dawn of time. This scenario has been depicted in fiction from Shakespeare to American Pie. It’s not fucking “child porn” if your characters aren’t sexless until their 18th birthdays. (Yeah, there are ways to be creepy about this, but it’s not automatically creepy to just write the words “and then the two teenagers had sex.”)
4. Some fic writing is serious exploration of the themes and implications of the source material. Some is more like when you’re a kid with mismatched action figures and you make Data fall in love with the triceratops. It’s really boring and unfair to come across doing something like this and get all high and mighty about how according to strict interpretation of the canon this would be an unhealthy relationship. Within the fic, they’re having their fun. Just let them.
5. Hey, remember the word “squick”? From way back in the day? It means “this thing is repellent to me, but I recognize that as a problem that occurs inside myself, not inside the thing?” We should use that word more.
6. People who harass authors and make actual death threats over all this can fuck off and go to hell. Whatever harm is theoretically supposedly done by impure fic, it can’t possibly be worse than that. Jesus Christ, get a fucking hold of yourselves.
What does the arab in your carrd mean? Is it like afab and amab?
.. i’m palestinian
i was with my mother’s family and they were talking to me about my religious studies major. my great aunt asked me what the definition of hell was, and i responded “well i suppose it depends on who you ask.” and nearly all the protestants in the group decided that hell was “the absence of god” which i suppose is a fair answer, albeit not a universal one. my cousin’s wife was playing with her 3-year-old daughter and she says “well mommy says that hell is a mcdonald’s playplace” asdfghjhgfd
this 3-year-old girl is so fucking hilarious. her mothers have signed her up for a toddler yoga class, and so she has adopted a very unique language. this child also has an imaginary friend named “mom” which is, in her mind, the boss of her two mothers. for example, my cousin’s wife explained to me how her daughter got mad at them one time. the little girl situated herself in the corner of her crib, pretended to type on a cell phone and said “im writing an email to mom right now and telling her how bad you two are. namaste.”
the family’s Big Theory about “Mom” is that both my cousin and her wife are referred to as “Mommy” and “Mama.” The nickname “Mom” is not used in the house because it would just be confusing. However, when interacting with the world, people tell their daughter that they will “tell her mom” if she is doing something wrong. so this child automatically assumes there is this greater “Mom” figure that is responsible for distributing universal justice.
To be fair to the toddler, that’s pretty much how religions get started.
Our Mom, who art gonna hear about this,
We know why.
so a lot of people in the notes are commenting that it’s weird that only the noses were broken because the rest of the face still looks African, or that the width of the break would still show the width of the statue’s nose
and that’s because the thing about “breaking off noses to make statues look less Black” is mostly, if not entirely, a myth
first of all, no matter what the statue is made of, protruding parts are going to be the weakest. it could be a modern resin figurine or an antique porcelain doll or an ancient granite bust- noses, fingers and toes, bits of headdresses, ceremonial beards, etc. are the most likely to break off. it’s not just Egyptian art you see damaged this way- Greco-Roman statues that clearly depict people we’d now consider white are also often missing noses:
Fun fact: the top two busts were probably defaced by early Christians, as evidenced by the crosses carved on their foreheads. which leads me to my next point- intentional damage for political or religious reasons
there was a common practice in ancient Egypt of defacing statues when the people they depicted fell out of favor, or to keep the spirits of the people portrayed from taking revenge on tomb robbers. it’s why we don’t have many images remaining of Hatshepsut; her successor destroyed most of them. and smashing specifically the nose was one way. you also see damage to noses of figures on flat wall carvings, to certain names painted or etched into objects, or even to mummies sometimes. later, like their Greek counterparts, Egyptian Christians (between the 1st and 3rd centuries A.D.) would often destroy what they saw as pagan idols
take one super-famous example: the Great Sphinx. according to 15th-century chronicler al-Maqrizi, the Sphinx’s nose was probably smashed off by a Muslim man in the 1370s, who was trying to “destroy the idol.” apparently the other Muslim locals were not pleased ,as they’d been making offerings to the Sphinx to ensure good harvests. regardless,the nose (and beard) were gone by the time Europeans arrived; pre-Napoleonic white visitors record that the statue had already been defaced
I would never try to say that there hasn’t been RAMPANT whitewashing of ancient Egypt. you should see the hoops some 19th-century scholars tried to jump through to claim that all ancient Egyptians where Totes White Actually (which involve debates over the appearance of statues, with white and Black scholars on the “Egyptians were Black” side pointing to African features to argue their case even on noseless statues), to say nothing of many popular depictions made during that time
just…this particular method of erasure doesn’t seem to have actually been a Thing
Also, Cleopatra was definitely not sub-Saharan African. She was the product of a whooooole lot of Macedonian incest.
“Die Religionen Müsen alle Tolleriret werden und Mus der fiscal nuhr das auge darauf haben, das keine der andern abruch Tuhe, den hier mus ein jeder nach Seiner Fasson Selich werden.”
All of the religions have to be tolerated, and the state has only to make sure that one does not does harm to the other, because everyone shall seek faith in his own fashion here.
Friedrich II. (der Große), (1712 – 1786), King of Prussia
(via thatswhywelovegermany )
This was in reference to and in context of mainly Catholicism and all the Protestant sects. NOT Islam and whatever tribal demonic crap 2000 miles away he would never imagine in Germany!
“Alle Religionen seind gleich und guht, wan nuhr die leute, so sie profesieren, erliche leute seindt; und wen türken und heiden kähmen und wolten das Land pöbplieren, so wollen wier sie Mosqueen und Kirchen bauen.”
All of the religions are equally good if only the people who practice them are honest people; and if turks and pagans came here and wanted to populate the country, then we want to build churches and mosques for them.
Friedrich II. (der Große), (1712 – 1786), King of Prussia
THERE YOU GO!!! THANKS FRIEDRICH!