What an adorable start to a murder
i had no idea they were so frickin huge
I love them so much because they’re about as sharp as a baseball and their anatomy is ridiculous to the point of them literally being classified as plankton for years because they just sort of get blown around by the ocean and look confused, but because they lay more eggs than ANY OTHER VERTEBRATE IN EXISTENCE, evolution can’t stop them
Why is no big predator coming and gnawing on them?
Their biggest defense is that they’re massive and have super tough skin, but they do get hunted by sharks or sea lions sometimes and they just sort of float there like ‘oh bother’ as it happens
Even funnier, because they eat nothing but jellyfish they’re really low in nutritional value anyway, so they basically survive by being not worth eating because they’re like a big floating rice cracker wrapped in leather.
So basically the only reason natural selection hasn’t taken care if them is because they are the most useless fish
yes, they’ve perfected uselessness to the point of being unstoppable
a true inspiration
Evolution didn’t care about fittest or best, it cares about the CARE MINIMUM.
Which is a being a giant leather rice cake.
AUTO REBLOG OF PACIFIC SUNFISH. MOTHER NATURE AT HER MOST WHIMSICAL. THE FARTHEST YOU GET FROM FISH DESIGN AND STILL CALL IT A FISH. AKA FLOATING CARDBOARD IN FISH FORM.
They aren’t useless, you monsters! The fact that they eat so many jellyfish is their exact ecological purpose. They are a key part of controlling jellyfish blooms. Sunfish keep jellyfish from taking up all the available space
All hail these jellyfish vacuums who make sure the other delicate creatures of the deep are not accidentally murdered by the jellyfish
Sea Roomba, you say?
“As early as the 1920s, researchers giving IQ tests to non-Westerners realized that any test of intelligence is strongly, if subtly, imbued with cultural biases… Samoans, when given a test requiring them to trace a route form point A to point B, often chose not the most direct route (the “correct” answer), but rather the most aesthetically pleasing one. Australian aborigines find it difficult to understand why a friend would ask them to solve a difficult puzzle and not help them with it. Indeed, the assumption that one must provide answers alone, without assistance from those who are older and wiser, is a statement about the culture-bound view of intelligence. Certainly the smartest thing to do, when face with a difficult problem, is to seek the advice of more experienced relatives and friends!”
— Jonathan Marks - Anthropology and the Bell Curve (via leofarto )
I was reading an interesting article years ago about collective memory. There have been a lot of thinkpieces over the years about how humans are getting lazier and worse at remembering things thanks to technology. There’s a tendency, particularly in the western world, to behave as if memorization was all people did prior to the internet.
But outside of artificial school test-taking environments, human beings have always relied on the collective memory of their close peers to keep track of information. Anyone who’s ever worked clothing retail knows that no single employee has the location of every item in the store memorized, but as long as you have enough people working the floor, nobody will ever have to waste time searching for an item because at least one employee is bound to remember which rack it’s on.
TL&DR - brains were never designed to function in isolation.
Testing the intelligence of an individual in an isolation is never going to give you an accurate idea of a person’s true intellectual potential.
Two (or more) heads is better than one.
My maternal grandfather was a math professor at the City University of New York. He died before I was born, but he passed a key bit of wisdom to my mother, and she passed it on to me:
The important thing is not knowing the answer, it’s knowing how to find the answer.
It our era of text and alphabets, that’s often knowing how to look something up. But for most of human existence, there were no alphabets. So knowing how to find the answer meant finding the person who knew the answer.
All human knowledge is cooperative.
Theatre of Pain era
Nikki on fire literally, Vince on fire figuratively
In case you didn’t know, I’m a Jesus Christ Superstar fanatic. I love it. It’s positively wonderful. And generally the most wonderful thing about it is the character Judas- The quality of your Judas has a big effect on the quality of your Jesus Christ Superstar. I made this handy little guide of the Judases we’ve seen so far, ranked from best to worst. Because it’s important.
This is absolutely correct! The quality of Judas predicts the quality of the entire Jesus Christ Superstar production. 70s Judas is also my favourite. It’s not that he doesn’t know where he is, it’s just that he CANNOT BELIEVE HIS EYES. He told the Apostles to lay low for awhile and Simon Zealot hosts a huge song and dance number right in front of the Roman Guards. He sings the lyrics ‘listen to me!’ for a reason.
The last one
Also good on these people for taking the aggressively petty route instead of falsely registering their pets as service animals
I love how everyone intentionally interpreted this not as “your dog must be small” but “your dog must be in a bag”
“aww cute!! big doggies in ba-”
*cry-laughing as i hit the reblog button*
Sixx and Neil
Mick Mars Close up
Wait for the master.
The amount of confidence oozing from this dude
i re-watched it several times, looking for what he does differently. finally i spotted it. look at the line of motion in his strike. it’s not especially fast, he doesn’t wind up more than the others, and it’s not a matter of strength – the guy who knocked over the stand probably put more muscle into it. but there’s a unity of movement he has that the others lack. his body and sword are all one curve. everything moves at once along the same line.
from a physics perspective, that means all the force he’s applying is concentrated at the point of contact between his sword’s edge and the target, and it moves at just the speed that breakage propogates through the material. too slow and it wouldn’t have enough force; too fast and he’d get ahead of the break, shoving the target over instead of cutting it.
from a writing perspective, that means that i should focus on describing a master swordsman’s smoothness more than their strength or speed, and can also have witnesses be confused at the effectiveness of strikes that don’t actually seem all that fast.
More than anything, it is probably edge alignment. It is one of the most important things swordsmen need to study; your best strike doesn’t do much if the sharp thing isn’t in the same line as the path of travel. A good sword is very very sharp and does most of the cutting work here. But when you’re 4 bamboo posts deep, if you have even a tiny bit of difference in the direction you’re trying to sweep and the direction the blade alignment wants to put your sword, you are going to find your blade comes to a very fast stop.
There’s also a difference between his end point and the other (unsuccessful) attempts. His end point is outside the last roll. If you look at some of the others, they are aiming *at* the rolls, not through the rolls. Their effective end point is point of contact, where the successful slice ends outside of the obstacle.
Also from a physics perspective: look at where he starts his slash: behind his back. That sword has so much angular momentum that it barely needs speed. And then to top it all off, the master bends his knees so his body follows the sword. If you look at the students in the beginning, some of them have a few of the points down and they get pretty far. Being a master is about having so much experience, that flawlessly combining three ways of making your cut more efficient looks easy.