#with ''and I know this is not scientifically accurate it's just an interesting system humans invented to classify ourselve and our traits | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

the-cat-and-the-birdie · 7 months

Note

Hi hi! I love how in depth and detailed you are when making/creating characters, or even when talking about other characters.

but I was curious, I wanted to be more inclusive/have more representation of PoC with my art works. But I do not know where to begin, or how to properly do research especially with how to research history and find accurate articles or so on.

Which I was curious on if you have any tips or pointers on how to do this/do my homework correctly?

THANKS!! OOOOhhhh I love research! And for a recent Spidersona, I had to do something like this. So here's the process I use to say things that kinda sorta make sense sometimes

How to Learn Any Topic RIGHT NOW- (kinda)

[A slightly LONG length post where I talk about my biggest resource and my number one tactic for sounding like you know your shit in an hour or less. Plus a list of educational Youtubers]

In High School, I mastered an art. The Art of 'Skyrim Speech 100'. The way to sound like you know what you're talking about, and form a pretty solid foundation of information in one sitting.

I am DEADASS CONVINCED that I have it boiled down to a very specific scientific formula. I got this I okay. I gotchu I swear I'm bout to have you like this im so deadass -

For me personally, the best resource is YouTube. One Website - Three Videos. And you're GOOD.

I have ADHD so - huge attention issues, so videos are a go to for me.

But I also really appreciate seeing the person explaining things to me. Finding good websites can be HARD, especially nowadays where a lot of websites might not even be written by humans, just clobbered together by AI.

For me, YouTube lets me see the person behind the channel, and it's a lot easier for me to vet the information if it's coming from one person who is open about their identity/certifications.

If their whole channel is dedicated to one thing, you can usually tell when they're very dedicated/educated on a topic, and I feel a lot more comfortable listening to them. Rather than reading random websites with writers I don't know/can't see.

Longform Youtube can be SO GOOD.

I'm gonna list some at the bottom - but you can find channels on everything. From architecture, to historical dress, to subway systems, entire cultures, etc.

In recent years Youtube has made a big push for longform content - so I recommend checking out videos that are 15 minutes OR MORE.

Not only is that enough time to go in depth, but because it's a video - the information is fed to you in a linear fashion. It's a lot more conversational and visual than reading a website.

If you hear something and need to remember, you can always go back. It can be hard to go back to a webpage and find the exact line, but videos are a bit easier.

Tips:

Try for find Youtubers that focus on ONE topic - or creators who go in depth about a wide array of interesting things (like Tom Scott or Anthony Padilla). Look for Doctors and Professors - A lot of educational professionals have youtube channels now. And they'll usually be upfront about it, searching things like 'History Professor explains X' or 'Doctor explains Y'. TEDTalks are good for this too. Look for people who are, or have the thing you're representing - If you're writing for a disability, it's always good to watch a video about the day in the life of someone with it - mental illnesses too. And there are a lot of great youtubers that easily break down things like cultural practices - or the issues they face because of their identity. Look for news channels. Watch current events. Vice, BBC, Channel 4, and have a lot of good current news, and they're posting videos every day. These videos show real life conditions while explaining it all, and they're really helpful for knowing about current political/cultural topics. DOCUMENTARIES!!!! - There is a documentary on anything. You can quote them in academics, and unlike movies, people post them on YouTube ALL the time, and people make them all the time. If you need to know about something, DOCUMENTARY.

I love using videos for everything, and below is how I use them:

I have a method that usually helps me sound like I'm super knowledgeable - By casting a very wide and very specific net over any topic. By narrowing any topic down to three parts, you can learn about 40% of a topic, but sound like you know 80%.

How to Teach Yourself Any Topic (in an hour and some change)

Three step method.

Watch three longform videos (15+ mins) about the topic. Each video about something slightly different.

The first video is about The History. This teaches us about the background of the topic. The second video is about The Expert Opinion. This teaches us about the reality of the topic. The third video is about a Random Topic inside of the main topic. This is to make us sound smart (in school)/add details or inspiration (while making characters).

Watch a fifteen minute video about each of these things, and in less than an hour, you'll have a pretty solid foundation of what it is, where it came from, and random (but surprisingly useful) details.

And when I say random I MEAN RANDOM. Can be anything - the niche, the better.

I'll give an example below with real search results and videos.

[I also give tips on how to search by topic (culture, religion, time period, etc) - as well as a list of educational BUT FUN Youtubers]

Example: I wanna make a Victorian Era Spider-woman.

The History Video - I watch a video about the general era, or what it was like being a woman in that time. I searched: Women in Victorian Era I found a real video titled: The Daily Life of a Victorian Lady

The Expert Opinion - I wanted to design her outfit accurately, so I looked for a Dress Historian's opinion on 1880's outfits I searched: Victorian Era Fashion I found a real channel: Bernadetta Banner (a channel all about recreating historical dresses - by a Broadway costume designer.)

The Random Topic - I don't know much about the Victorian Era..but I know theres two topics people always relate to the era - Sherlock Holmes and Jack the Ripper. I chose Sherlock. Sooooo, I watched a video about whether BBC sherlock was better than Downy Sherlock. Why? Because in 15 minutes it tells me about the show, the movie, AND the book - ALSO while teaching about the time period. I searched: BBC Sherlock vs Book I found a real video titled: Sherlock vs Sherlock - Which Iteration is Superior.

So after three 15-20 minute videos I know the history, the facts, and some random niche details of a topic.

Do I know everything about it? Not at all! But doing that, usually you can probably get through a conversation without freaking out too much.

By doing all that - I now know enough about the Victorian Era. From those videos I can accurately write an average Victorian woman, design her outfit accurate to the era, and also infuse some Victorian literature influence into her story.

All in an hour.

It works for other people character's too. Watching a video on the 70's, a video on the Punk Movement, and then a video of lets say a video about the band Ramones

Methods:

Some ideas for different topics:

If you want to show a character from a different time period -

If you're trying to write a character like Hobie, first watch a video about the history of the period - to understand when they were living. Then watch a video on their style/subculture - like the Punk movement. Then pick a specific band/media from the era and watch a video on it.

Sidebar: This is actually how I made Diane! I have little to no idea about the 70's outside of Punk. So searched up the history of 70's Disco, a video by Glamour about 1970's fashion, and I only knew one or two Disco singers (Donna Summer & Diana Ross) - so I chose Diana Ross. Diana is the direct inspiration for Diane's name and big hair. I never reference Diana, but it helps Diane fit the Disco theme, by emulating one of THE disco queens.

If you want to show a character from a different country -

Like India for example, a good place to start is watching a video about the history of India, then watching a vlog from someone in India (in the area you're thinking of), then watch a video about Indian fashion, or indian street food, or indian family traditions - so you can sprinkle those details into the story or conversation. Then you can build from there. Big tip: If they're from the city watch a video about the city's transit/subway system if they have one. It's a VERY fast way to learn the city, and make it sound like they actually live there, even if you're just name dropping stations and town squares.

If you want to show a character with a mental illness, disability or condition -

Start off by searching the background of the condition. Have a doctor break down what it is, how it effects the body, the mind, or both. Then watch a video of an average person with the condition, and their experience day to day. Then try and find a specific advocate, celebrity, or influence who goes into depth about it and how they empower themselves.

If you want to show someone from a different religion -

Watch a video about the beliefs of the religion, then the history of the religion, then a video of someone who practices the religion.

ETC-

Now disclaimer, this won't make you actually know everything about the topic - but at the very least, you'll probably be using the terms and words right. And you might be able to think up your own thought from there.

I used this ALL THROUGH High School.

If I know next class is about Marie Antoinette - yeah sure lemme go run and learn about her life history, her fashion taste, and the architecture of the Palace of Versailles in an hour.

Now I can talk about her childhood, personality, and where she lived.

The Great Gatsby? Never read it and I never will. The movie? NEVER SEEN IT. I searched up the history/inspiration of the author, watched a video on the book's plot and symbolism, then watched a video on the book vs the movie.

From there I kinda understood what the book was about, why the author might have written it, the symbolic ho-ha, and the extra details as if I watched the movie too.

And from there I could formulate whether I think the symbolism matters to our modern day society and why the director changed small details from the book, and etc, etc.

It was enough for me to bullshit and say words and usually people are like 'yeah you seem to be making sense' lol

HELL throw in ANOTHER video about the lives of women in the 1920's and I could probably bullshit an argument on how the Great Gatsby reflects gender roles in the Flapper Era. Like gun to my head I could probably come up with something im so deadass

HEY IM NOT SAYING SLACK OFF IN SCHOOL OKAY - DO NOT THIS IS JUST MY TESTIMONIAL - USE THIS TO LEARN TOPICS NOT BOOKS ITS A GREAT TOOL

Also disclaimer: use this for good don't be walking around like you Know Know Shit cause someone might check you and then i cant help you this is just a way to understand the basis of topics and be able to form thoughts and hold conversations about them or use them in your art and writing.

Plus it's a great way to gather strong resources for your art and writing.

It's a lot easier to show characters in a natural accurate way when you've curated a very rounded understanding of the topic or era - not just in an educational historical sense.

For the purposes of character creation, essays, sounding like you know anything in conversations - this does help. And you do start absorbing stuff. It's just about breaking the topic down, and learning about it in blocks.

If you understand the history, you can understand the now, and if you understand the now, you can understand the nuance. Like that.

I hope this helped! And because tis customary here, take this photo of Hobart Brown and go forth

And because I cannot send you off into the wild with no place to start here are some of my favorite youtubers that are actually FUN - here's a list.

Bye.

Youtube Channels

Bernadette Banner - Historical Clothing Expert specializing in Edwardian - Victorian

RMTransit - Videos about subway systems, buses, and public transit across the world. VERY quick way to realistically learn about a city

Anthony Padilla - Has lots of 'I Spent a Day With-' videos, where he sits down with people. Has videos ranging on things from Dipolar Disorder and ADHD to things like Asexuality and Ex-Mormons. Good for getting multiple honest experiences of people.

ReligionForBreakfast - Simple approachable videos about religions, their histories and beliefs. Made by a doctor of Religious Studies

Cognito - VERY good historical, cultural, and geographical videos, all cutely animated

Tasting History with Max Miller - Historically accurate cooking videos with really cool stories and histories to match

Vice News - Very good, very vetted Left-leaning news source. Vice and Vice News are two different things. Vice News is really good for current events videos on things like conflicts in countries.

Johnny Haris - slightly longer explainer videos about countries, geography, history, and weird quirks

Vox - Short detailed explainers about....anything really.

Weird History - .....It's history that's weird

Absolute History - Longer Documentaries about History, mainly the 1900's

CrowsEyeProductions - Really good Historical Fashion videos of 1400-2000's

Morgon Donner - ANOTHER Historical Fashion channel (they're really interesting yall) that focuses more on Medieval era

J.J McCullough - REALLY good videos about culture in general, as well as geography videos full of full interesting facts (did you know Nepal is the only country with a flag not four sided?) He also has some spicy takes on Canadian and Quebec politics that are interesting to me as an American but ????

Kati Moron - A therapist who makes videos about the experiences of mental illnesses and their treatment

Dr. Tracey Marks - A Doctor who makes short videos explaining the symptoms and experiences of neurodivergences and mental illnesses

#no proofread #Writing #fanfic writing #oc #spidersonas #spidersona #studyblr #study motivation #writing advice

84 notes · View notes

cybertroniannugget · 6 months

Text

Pangea and mt Vesuvius

Not what I originally intended to post here, as I'm writing some spice at the moment but THIS is what my mind was occupied with all freaking day... The whole desaster takes place somewhere in the first movie or between 1 and two. Some details are changed up Which I did on purpose. I know all the movies from start to finish because the hyperfixations are hyperfixating real hard right now.

This is just a random story of how I get idk let's say teleported into the bayverse movies and how I'd probably handle that.

While I sprinkled in a bit more confidence than I actually got, I think it's an accurate representation of what kind of person I am: always cracking jokes, overthinking EVERYTHING, random useless knowledge that turns out to be somewhat useful.

About this fic: sfw, implied romance with OP, trans ftm character, no reader just Alex, confused Autobots they still need to learn so much about earth and everything, I also don't know okay?

This is just me struggling while simping hard for Optimus.

But we still ain't know what fucked up big M's navigation system when he crashed. Infact, why are all of our navigation systems useless here?! ", Jazz adressed, arms crossed over his chassis. "We all be getting lost all the time.

"I think I know why"

Oh please, why did I speak up just now...

All optics and eyes were fixed on me as I said that, making me immediately regret opening my mouth in the first place but here we are now.

"What? Maybe your systems think you're on Pangea.", I said, taking in the same position as Jazz by crossing my arms over my chest.

Optimus leaned closer, one servo on the railing, blue optics studying me thoroughly as to look for any signs of lie in my attitude.

"Pangea? May you elaborate?"

Hearing this deep voice so full of interest made me feel things honestly.

"The supercontinent. Wait, Imma show you."

I take out my phone, careful not to reveal the background, because I couldn't find the time to change it yet.

"Here, this is earth today. You see everything, Europe, Asia, South and North America, Autralia, Greenland and all the islands in the oceans."

"And this is Pangea, it broke apart into the continents as we know them today about 200 million years ago. This is probably what Megatron had in mind. See? When you look at a map of earth today you might think, if you turn south America around and snug it up to north America, they fit like a puzzle. It's because they were together as part of the supercontinent. Or push it up to Africa, same thing. Just squish it all together"

"That human is incredibly well educated.", Ratchet chimed in.

"That human has a name and thank you."

"But why did that happen? It makes no sense.", Ironhide complained, lifting one servo as to show his frustration in what I just said.

"If I may...", I look at Lennox, awaiting some kind of approval to continue. He nods and so I proceed with my explanation.

"Well, I don't know how to explain it scientifically, but I'll try to make it understandable."

Optimus nods, listening carefully. How do these highly educated space robots not know about that? But who am I to judge, they aren't from here so I can't expect them to know everything about earth.

"I think it probably started because of something called mantle convection. That means the heat from earth's interior rises up to the hardened crust. That caused it to break open, creating a volcanic rift zone. The cracks went further, the tectonic plates drifted apart. The rifts filled with water over time and while the plates drifted farther away, the oceans were formed. Or something like that I don't know but today we've got 6 continents."

Always undermining everything I say, great job on trying to act confident...

"And Greenland, I don't discriminate.", I added as some people eyed me.

"But I don't know if Pangea is what your systems used as the base to calculate. There were other tectonic combinations even before that, but it's a wild guess I'd say. I am certain it was one of them."

As I was explaining, Optimus' gaze changed to a warmer tone and I could feel my pulse rise to my ears. He was just so beautiful, and seeing him for the first time in person made my heart flutter uncontrollably. I wish I could tell him how I feel,

But this is real. No scenarios, no daydreaming or fanfiction. It was as real as it could get. Damn it, I wanted to shift here, not get teleported or whatever caused me to end up here with all of them. I hope we can atleast become friends. No need to get my hopes up though.

"Alexander?"

The baritone voice of the Prime pulled me out of my thoughts about him.

"Hm?"

"What kind of heat were you talking about?"

"Oh that. Well, starting at earth's core, it's liquid magma. It's really hot, like 5.200 Celsius hot. 9.000 something Fahrenheit for the Americans here..."

This was met with laughter and I continued with my lesson or whatever you might wanna call it I don't care, I'm struggling here okay?

"The further you go up, the 'cooler' it gets.", I say, underlining the word cooler with my hands in a joking matter.

"They probably got fancy scientific names but don't ask me which. Anyways shit's really hot. And it's what shoots up from volcanoes.", I finish as I look into a round of confused optics and a few tilted helms.

"Volcanoes? When tectonic plates crush against each other, or built up pressure is released, no?"

They all look at eachother, chuckling coming from my fellow humans around me.

"Okay here, that's mt vesuvius, big ass volcano."

"Sometimes these mfs shoot lava from this hole up there, pretty fascinating and scary at the same time.. It looks like this.", I add as they look at the pictures, not knowing whether to be amazed or afraid.

"The glowing stuff you see here is the lava. When it's still underneath the crust it's called magma."

"Are there many on earth?"

"Yup, don't get too close."

Optimus' optics widen at that statement of mine

"Don't worry bossbot, not on this island. The closest from here is next to Madagascar, Africa. Unless you decide to swim a few rounds up there there's no need to get worried."

The Prime relaxes, shoulders dropping while optics still focused on me.

Why is he looking at me like that? I mean I ain't complaining but if he continues like that Imma internally combust.

"You explain everything so well Alexander."

"Please, call me Alex. Alexander seems so long."

The Prime nods understandingly. "Very well then, Alex."

Oh god make it stop. I love you so much Optimus please...!

"His heart rate just shot up exponentially.", Ratchet mentioned and it was right then and there that I wanted to vanish, dissappear, sink into the ground, never to be seen again.

"Haha yeah, chronic Tachycardia, no need to worry."

That was a lie. Yes, my pulse is through the roof right now, but I've got no heart disease.

As I was met with confusion from every bot except Ratchet I explained before any questions could be asked.

"It's a general term to describe an elevated heartrate. You know, the thing in a human's chest that pumps blood through our body."

"Blood?"

"Oh come on. Okay, well then I can explain that to you guys later. And answer any questions you have as it seems no one else here cares about your education on earth and it's inhabitants.", I say grumpily, looking at Lennox, who raised his hands in defeat.

"I can see us becoming friends Alex.", Jazz laughed.

"Looking forward to it!", I said, pointing fingerguns at the silver bot, which is met with more laughter.

"Okay, class is over, what are we gonna do now?", Ironhide asks into the round of bots and humans.

I just shrug, looking at Optimus, who was still looking at me. But when I looked at him, he quickly looked away to Ironhide.

Cutie~

"Alex seems to know so much, why not ask her?."

That statement of a bystanding soldier was met with a glare from Optimus.

"Alex is a he, you better make sure to remember that!"

They went to protest, but Optimus wouldn't let them. "Unless you wish to get what humans call fired."

Oh shit he's really mad...

"I will make sure of that if you continue your unreasonable behavior."

As he said that I could swear I saw the soldier shrink right then and there infront of my own two eyes.

He looks at everyone. "This counts for everyone here. You will respect Alex."

Oh god, he's standing up for me I can't please marry me Optimus, like right now!

"Okay, lessons aside.", Epps put a hand on my shoulder, smiling. "You were great by the way. I think we can use that for good."

He looked between everyone, a stern expression replacing the warm smile, hand leaving my shoulder. "As much as of a crucial hint this is, we can't know for sure what's exactly causing the malfunction. Better dig people."

True honestly, but HOW is anyone supposed to figure it out without cutting someone open? Megs maybe...?!

"Something's on your mind again, I can see that.", Bumblebee said with snippets over the radio.

"What, me?! It's nothing."

"Nothing?!", Jazz protested. "You just gave us the best clue we could ask for. I'm no Optimus Prime but I can say that I wanna hear ya out my man."

He looks up at Optimus, who was looking at me again after listening to his lieutenant.

"I must say, that you have given us great insight on your mental capabilities Alex."

He leans closer and it took everything of the mental capabilities he just mentioned to not kiss him right here right now.

"Well uh, it's just some kind of impulsive thought. You know, the ones you can't really control...",I said nervously, one hand behind my neck, avoiding everyone's gaze.

But he didn't budge, only blinking once while awaiting an answer.

"Okay, you're not budging I see. Fine."

Taking a deep breath and regretting every life choice I had made up until that point, I went on. "Look, I don't know anything about Cybertronian culture and how things are handled. Especially this right here. Us humans, we always wanna know what exactly caused certain events. For example death here. So we came up with analyzing the body of the dead by cutting them open and stuff, it's called autopsy. Maybe, just maybe we could find something. I know Megatron ain't dead but he's in some sort of... Stasis? Someone could check his navigation system and maybe find the cause for the disruption."

I lower my shoulders, trying to be as small as I possibly could infront of Optimus, who's gaze I couldn't quite interpret.

"On Cybertron, there is quite a similar practise."

"So you're saying it's worth a shot, Prime?", Ironhide asks, unsure of what to think of the situation. "But he's not dead, as Alexander pointed out correctly.", Ratchet added.

Optimus turned around to face his Autobots.

"This may be our only chance. We must take it. For the sake of both worlds. This war has been going on for so long, we cannot let this hold us down. And now it seems there is a way to find out why this is happening. We will fix it, together."

Now it was on Lennox to speak up again.

"So we gon' dissect Megatron? I'm all in honestly. That fucker did enough damage."

My eyes widen at that. "They're not gonna kill him!" Unsure of the righteousness of what I just said I looked at Optimus, who nodded.

"See? They're just gonna take out the navigation system and leave."

"Ooh, big M is gonna be SO mad when he finds out."

"He won't.", Optimus retorted with an absolute certainty in his voice.

"Alright then, it's settled. Prepare people and gather as much information as possible for this mission and await any orders from Big O!"

And with that final order of Lennox the soldiers scattered around, leaving immediately.

Okay great, I'm gonna go be useless again wohoo.

"Alex?"

I look toward the sound of the voice I already grew to cherish. "I know, I know. I ain't accompanying you. I'd die if I did, already know that."

The Prime nods.

"I am glad you understand."

I love you so much I wish I could tell you...

As he remained standing there I grew nervous, fidgeting with the strings of my hoodie.

"Is there something you need?"

"Wha- me? No! Just... go be a hero.

You know you're good at it."

I clear my throat, pretty sure Optimus could hear my pulse. "But remember to take a break sometimes. I always see you up and about."

Did I overstep? I knew it. Chance blown. Goodbye earth. No romance.

"I highly appreciate your concern Alex."

He's always saying my name help. Is he just being polite or what does this mean?!

"There is this human saying. What was it again? I grab it with my heart...?"

Please he's so cute I can't~

"I'll take it to heart was it probably. It means to honor someone's wishes as you see them important."

He tilts his helm in question. "The person or the wish?"

That is when I think all the 5 liters of blood inside my body went up to my face.

Keep calm, stay cool Alex. Don't embarrass yourself.

"It's up to the person saying that."

Whatever higher power there is, please help me!

"You deem my wellbeing as important and so do I"

Phew, that was close...

"Can it be both?"

WHAT

"Eh, sure. There's always room for interpretation."

I guess...?

What has my life come to? They probably think I'm a know it all person. I gotta keep my damn mouth shut from now on.

"Very well then Alex, I look forward to working with you."

I only nod, trying not to get lost in those beautiful blue optics.

"I'm sure it's gonna be great Optimus!"

Unless I unsubscribe from life because a Deception squishes me...

#transformers x reader #optimus prime x reader #optimus x reader #what the fuck #what is this #what is happening #i don't know #what am i doing #send help #i do be simpin

51 notes · View notes

tranny-alcchemy · 2 months

Note

Hello! Im finally sending another science thing! studying zoology Im back at my intial believe, I used to believe in the kingdom classifications as any young biologist would. Then I started believing in the domain classifications. And now im like, non clade taxonomy doesnt make any sense

so even the newly published paper asking for an empire or even a 3 life taxonomy structures are just.. trying to tape over the old sciences I dont see a pro of a non clade taxonomy structure It only made sense before we started DNA sequencing life bc now we know that life only was created once in the entire history of Earth. So everything evolved from one thing So have a taxonomy where there different types of life from the start is.. wrong

It only helps to keep the non scientific terms alive. Bc if we dont have the hierchy taxonomy we cant call only specific animals what we call them like cats wont be just the things we casually call cats if we adopt a clade structure And humans would be monkeys and apes depending on which clade u go back to

From what I read so far, biologists already use clade classifications in research. And microtaxonomists neontologists handle the kingdom classifcations later And im kinda fine with that, but I wouldnt use the kindgoms in my head atleast

Disclaimer: I'm not a taxonomist so stuff i say may be wrong

honestly? the traditional biological ranking system sucks. i mean, its okay, but cladistics give the viewer much more information about what am organism is and how theyre related to others imo.

it also offers much greater room for nuance like in the case of birds and crocadillians. in traditional taxonomy, or at least the way i was taught in school, birds fall under class aves and crocadilians under class reptilia. this, ofc, implies crocadillians are closer related to other traditional reptilians than they are to birds, which isnt true. a cladistic approach, imo, is better suited to reflect those actual relationships.

Of course, this does lead to some interesting conclusions since, cladistically, once an organism is something, it will never stop being that thing. For example, this means all tetrapods are technically fish. However, personally I would not consider that a flaw but moreso a feature. After all, when would tetrapods stop being fish? There's no good point where you can accurately say they aren't that isn't super arbitrary. theres more to be said, but im tired so ill leave it at this for now

#fairypost

11 notes · View notes

snowyvoid · 12 days

Note

I love your haunted siphonophore posting so much it's really good. I think it really fits with how the science team and the game and benrey all sort of play off of each other with Gordon always ending up as the victim/'food' but there's a slight dissonance between all of them. Benrey comes back as a skeleton and for the first night he just walks around and talks like normal until after Gordon wakes up where it seems to become it's own creature that is more tethered to the gamespace (I know it clips out and fucks with geometry but it also feels like it starts to slot into the role of 'spooky skeleton to antagonize and frighten the player' instead of 'benrey is around and talking to people when he's supposed to be dead'). Or how the world seems to bend to fit the insane things the Science Team says (Sunkist, Chuck E Cheese, Passport, etc) but Coomer is still seperate enough from the game that he becomes frightened and angry when he realizes that his world is small and painted. They all kind of group up into one thing, which is basically an elaborate bait and trap for Gordon, but there's tension between the individual pieces and they all have unique perspectives on what's happening despite playing into the same greater thing.

Sorry I'm having a hard time capturing exactly what you meant into this I get what you meant it's just. words are difficult. But your hlvrai thoughts make me insane

no this is like. exactly what i mean. you get it.

the thing about siphonophores is that each component of the organism has its own mouths. like. one component will be the stomach, one will make the organism swim, etc etc, but they all have their own mouths. they all feed.

and there is always this kind of dissonance between gordon and the others, and yes obviously he is the one playing a video game, but i always felt like it went deeper than hostile AI being weirded out by the new guy. it felt more,,, natural?? i guess??? it all feels set up on a stage. aside from the fact that its a game and it is has coded events. the AI, the thing that is suppose to think for itself, still seems kinda. within its own limits. stuck within the body of the facility. (for example, coomer and/or bubby freaking out when they go outside of the skybox/into space).

but the dissonance between the science team and the game/facility is!!! oh my godddd!!!! i could write an essay on that shit. so interesting. and i love that the dissonance is often physically manifested. your hatred towards this thing that you hate is real and will be seen and will affect the world outside you.

like. you have this thing, a large container that has events and ideas that are built into it (the game, the organism as a whole, the haunted house), and there are different components within this container that have some kind of symbiotic relationship (good or bad) with the outside container (black mesa, the individual nervous systems of the organism, the rooms/ghosts/humans haunting* the house), and all of these individual components has a manifestation of its difference or hostility (the science team, the individual mouths, the opinions each component of the haunted house has on each other (i need to make another post about this)).

sorry that was probably really complicated. i just needed to get it out of me because its all ive been thinking about since i made that first post.

*this is within the idea that the hypothetical house is haunted by something. which is generally the idea i go for when in reference to sentient AI, the whole this house had a purpose and it changed, this AI had a code and it was faulty. etc etc. pretty sure ive already posted something about that.

weird little mspaint diagram with some other ideas i have not talked about. note; this is not scientifically accurate to siphonophores. i just thought they were a really good allegory. you are definitely gonna need to zoom in for this thing. but it is important to the explanation i guess.

i just find it really fun to put obvious differences between characters/living things and see where they come together. like the science team, gordon, and benry are all separate beings in their own way but they are like a family. blah. hope you enjoy as always this is a bit messy.

#hlvrai #stupid diagram took way to long to make #whatever. i hope this sums it up well. and thank you so much for adding stuff on tjodity i always adore your additions.#they keep this trainwreck of an AU going strong #excuse any spelling and/or grammar mistakes im really bad at this #derealization #unreality #haunted house hlvrai au

8 notes · View notes

random-iz-stuff · 1 year

Note

Ok so how do you think scientifically accurate irkens would look like?

To give you a little bit of an idea I was talking with my dad the other day and I was explaining what the fandom currently knows about irken anatomy and then he pointed out some inaccurate things in their biology for example being so similar to insects even in metabolism but have cheeks and tongue and teeth, the tallest getting their thumb cut off but still grab things etc… so I wanted to know what were your takes on realistic irkens.

Realistic Irken anatomy is interesting. Because Irkens have a lot of stuff that’s comparable to animals on Earth, but a lot of their biology simply has no comparison.

Irkens are bug-LIKE, but they can’t be bugs. Same goes for every single Earth animal classification because Irkens aren’t a creature native to Earth. Irk is completely different and unlike any biomes found on Earth, so it’s impossible to fit Irkens into an Earth-based classification system. They’re simply too different and have origins that are way too separate from anything on Earth.

Irkens have a lot of biology traits associated with bugs, like the antenna, eyes and strength for example, but at the same time Irkens have multiple things that go against them being bugs. For example, Irkens can sweat, are (presumably) warm-blooded and are made for living in cold environments (going off of how quickly Zim succumbed to the heat in Door To Door while the humans around him were completely fine) and don’t have exoskeletons like you’d normally see on an insect. Irkens have bones inside them.

There’s also the things like the mouth and teeth. Like you said, Irkens have cheeks and tongues and teeth, which bugs don’t have. But at the same time, Irken mouths seem to be very different compared to animals that DO have those things, with Zipper shaped teeth that seem to be all fused together into two teeth, one large zipper tooth on top and one on the bottom. Smeets also only have one singular tooth when they’re born, implying that the smeet tooth eventually falls out and is replaced by the adult zipper teeth.

Irkens also have those worm-like tongues, and they seem to have a lot more control over their tongues than something like a human. Irken tongues aren’t prehensile, but they’re close.

For the Tallest being able to grab things with only two fingers, I’d have to explain that using my headcanons for Irken origins, mostly them descending from winged cave-dwellers that grabbed onto and climbed the rock walls of their cave home used clawed hands and tiny hairs on their hands very similar to how geckos stick to surfaces. Modern Irkens still have these traits and the Tallest, being the only members of Irken society that are allowed to keep their fingers exposed, can use them to effectively grab things without thumbs.

And that’s without getting into detail over things like Irken blood colour and organs. Irken blood is canonically pink, a trait that Irkens share only with a type of undersea worm. And in terms of organs, Irkens have exactly one: the Squeedlyspooch. A superorgan containing everything that the body needs to live including the digestive system, lungs, and heart. I’m like 99.9% sure we don’t have any creatures on Earth with anything similar to a Squeedlyspooch.

Speaking of organs, the Irken respiratory system is very similar to ours judging by how Zim can breath on Earth without needing a spacesuit. So Irkens breathe oxygen just like humans.

Irken skin is capable of killing parasites like lice and ticks, presumably being coated in or secreting something that’s toxic to them, but is harmed by the pollutants found in most Earth liquids and the preservatives in meat.

Irken muscles are also very different from anything on Earth. In canon, an Irken can lift over three times it’s body weight with no upper limit being specified. I headcanon that upper limit as being about four times the Irken’s body weight. I also headcanon Irk as having twice the gravity of Earth. So Irkens evolved to deal with much higher gravity than anything did on Earth, and their muscles reflect that, being far more efficient and effective than the muscles of any creature on Earth simply because those extra efficient muscles are a necessity to any life on Irk. They probably look completely different compared to human muscles.

Irken ears are also pretty much unique. Irkens have an inner ear that they use to hear things, but they have no earholes, implying that the inner ear doesn’t have or need any. I headcanon that Irkens can also hear using their antenna, but it’s more of a redundant, secondary way of hearing that isn’t as effective as the inner ear.

So to sum up my vision of a scientifically accurate Irken:

A whole bunch of bug traits (antenna, simple eyes like a spider and a diet consisting primarily of sugar and other raw carbohydrates for example), but they aren’t bugs

Clawed hands and feet originally meant to grab onto rock walls when Irkens were cave-dwellers

Hands also have microscopic gecko-like hairs on them that were also originally meant to grab onto rock walls, but nowadays are only really used by the Tallest to grab things without thumbs

Warm-blooded and made for cold temperatures, with the Irken quickly overheating if placed in an environment that’s too hot

Capable of sweating to cool down, but this looses effectiveness at a lower temperature compared to human sweat

Smeets are born with one tooth that eventually falls out and is replaced by the Irken’s adult, zipper-shaped teeth

Has a lot of control over its tongue. It isn’t prehensile, but it’s close

Pink blood

One superorgan that preforms all the actions needed to keep the body alive

Breathes oxygen and is perfectly fine in Earth’s atmosphere

Muscles are specifically designed for an environment with way more gravity than Earth and are extremely powerful when compared to the muscles of an Earth creature, being able to lift up to four times the Irken’s body weight

Inner ear with no earhole

Skin is somehow toxic to small parasites like ticks, fleas and lice

Skin also burns upon contact with the toxins in Earth water and meat

Generally has a wide variety of different traits from all sorts of different creatures that make Irkens unclassifiable as one singular type of animal or insect. They’re too different and separate from anything on Earth, primarily because they aren’t native to Earth to begin with

#invader zim #asks #headcanons #irken biology #this was a really fun ask to think about and write down

51 notes · View notes

solarpunkpresentspodcast · 6 months

Text

Mashing Solarpunk and Cyberpunk to Wage War Against War in The Creator

I saw the movie The Creator last night, which turned out to be a brooding love child of cyberpunk and solarpunk. I think we need a name for that genre mashup because there’s some interesting threads there to mine. The Creator also made me wonder, when did films get so beautiful. Every last frame of this film is a work of art of exceptional composition and clarity. And the sound... just wow, from the stirring yet perfectly integrated musical score to the map of sounds happening around you as the action progresses. If nothing else (and yet much more), The Creator is exactly why we should be fighting for the lives of our movie theaters. It breaks my heart to think of all the young’uns out there who are going to watch this film on their phone and will never have any idea what they’re missing by not having seen it on a big screen with a top–notch sound system. Even watching a film like this on the best HD TV you could hang on your living room wall would be like looking at a print of a Picasso instead of seeing its power in person.

The Creator takes place in an alternate timeline where we dove into AI and robotics with such gusto so early on, there were AI robots in spacesuits in space missions on NASA’s Space Shuttles (circa early 80s to early 2010s), not to mention acting as mother’s little helpers in the kitchens of the 1950s (if my memory is accurate of the “news reel” that rolled for the rocket ride that is the film’s opening montage). In short, The Terminator films clearly not existing in this timeline, humanity made the mistake of leaving the AIs in charge of defense systems and Los Angeles got nuked. And that’s just the first 75 seconds of the film (more or less).

Despite the fact that hardly anyone one who doesn’t live in Los Angeles cares a whit about the place—in fact,lots of folks actively fantasize about its demise (I’m thinking, most recently, of Kim Stanley Robinson's meanly gleeful and scientifically inaccurate drowning of the LA basin within about the space of a day via atmospheric river storms in The Ministry for the Future)—the USA goes full post-9/11 and declares war on AI. This means hunting down and mercilessly exterminating hotbeds of AI development in “New Asia.” Cue violent raids into New Asian countries by squads of American commandos with mind–bogglingly mighty tanks; a permanently airborne war station that locates targets, coordinates attacks, and launches savage missile attacks; and the most arrogant, single-minded, and cruel military characters imaginable.

That is, except for the protagonist. Sure, he’s an elite commando, but (SLEDGEHAMMER OF A METAPHOR) he’s a little bit robot himself, with all those bionics to replace limbs lost (in combat, presumably, given that his more innocent explanation sounds like an evasive lie). He fell in love with and married a New Asian woman while infiltrating her “terrorist” troupe of AI developers. This splits his sympathies. Considerably. Still, the top brass puts him in charge of re–infiltrating New Asia to seek and destroy the AI “weapon” the “terrorists” have developed. But this “weapon to end all weapons” turns out to be the AI equivalent of a human child who holds the key to the protagonist reuniting with the protagonist’s seemingly terrorist wife. As well as maybe also holding the key to world peace. Meanwhile, the child AI needs the love, protection, and guidance of a parent to survive and develop deeply human emotions. (Because, you know, emotions. They’re what make people do good things, right?)

Movies being movies, a lot of people and seemingly sentient machines are going to have to die in splatters of gunfire and spectacular explosions before we can find out who wins: the US military meanies or the AI robots and their friends, who just want to live free in peace and harmony.

Thematically, there’s a lot going on in The Creator. It’s very anti-colonialism, for instance. It also wonders how sentient robots will feel about being, essentially, slaves. It wants to tell us that maybe AI will be good for us. Instead of wanting to exterminate us—we who are actually the violent ones who refuse to see the humanity in others—maybe AI will want to be our friends and partners. Maybe AI will help us to develop the humanity lurking somewhere within ourselves and make us better human beings.

But for me, the overarching theme of The Creator is rage at America’s arrogantly militaristic habit of seeing things in black and white (US vs them, good guys vs terrorists, humans vs AI) and of annihilating the enemy at all cost, including that of the lives, livelihoods, housing, and villages of the civilians we don’t see as mattering. Watching this bitter rebuke to “shock and awe” was especially moving right now, on the brink (at least at the time of this writing) of Israel’s potential offensive into Gaza that will be Israel making the same mistake America made after 9/11. We could have taken the world’s sympathy and support (for we had it!) and used it to make the world a better, more equitable, more peaceful, much less impoverished, and more just place. Instead, we spent decades extracting bloody, violent revenge for a single terrorist act. Yes, our pride was wounded, and yes, nearly 3,000 people died as a result of the 9/11 terrorist attack, but the damage and death we caused in response with our mighty military machinery and soldiers gained us nothing, not even satisfaction. All it did, besides kill people and destroy their homes, was take the world into a dark, unstable place where there are now so many sides (within societies and between them) and they all hate each other. We all hate each other and this is ripping the fabric of our societies apart and making life more horrible for everyone. Rampaging like a million Godzillas on methamphetamine might feel as good as smashing glass when you’re mad, but it’s not right. It’s what evil empires do and it has terrible geopolitical repercussions. Especially when you wrap up your claim in the mantle of morality that you don’t actually have.

Of course, few movies are without their flaws. A lot happened in this movie that strained all credibility... and for the most part, it wasn’t the speculative elements. If the plot consisted of a lot of interlocking threads, every last one of them went full circle and tied itself into a tidy little bow by the end, which was ridiculous. Related to this, foreshadowing struck often and always like a sledgehammer. And there were far too many implausible events... characters who just happened to stumble in the right direction to end up in the right place at literally exactly the right time to make exactly the connection (that had gotten set up in another implausible and convoluted set of circumstances) that was totally unexpected (but that you saw coming 30 minutes previously because of the sledgehammer foreshadowing), etc. The AI child has extraordinary powers over machines when the plot needs it to but doesn’t have those powers when the plot needs it not to. The US military people are all such hardcore, single-minded, murder–all–the–AIs–at–all–cost lunkheads that the tragic backstory they give at least one of them to excuse it just comes across as laughable. Also, come on. Los Angeles gets nuked and only a couple of million people die? Does the alternate timeline not know that nearly 20 million people live in the Los Angeles megalopolitan area? Also, why barrage AI hot spots with bombs and missiles, doing so much collateral damage, when a great bit electromagnetic pulse would be far more effective while simultaneously sparing human beings and their homes?

Despite this, the movie is a moving spectacle. And it felt new. Which is not easy to do, as anyone who has sat down to try to write sci–fi could tell you. Sci–fi is so far beyond the first flush of its youth, unless you're really good, that just about any story you come up with has been written several times before. Despite the clunkier aspects of the plot, whoever wrote The Creator is really good. This sci–fi movie broke ground.

These days, I rarely stay for the credits of movies, but I felt compelled to for The Creator. It was so magnificently made, I’d found myself wondering how you would even go about writing a prospectus for a film like this. It was filmed at so many different places around the world and it had so much excellent CGI, there was only one moment in the movie where I was like, oh, that’s totally obviously CGI (and normally I scoff all the time at CGI). How would you even begin to figure out how many people you’d need to make a film this epic and detailed, much less how to coordinate their efforts. How could you begin to calculate how long it would take to make a movie this ambitious or how much it would cost so that the end result was excellent? (Turns out, the cost is $80 million, which is between a quarter and a third of the cost of a typical Marvel movie.)

My best guess—before and after watching the extensive credits—is that it took at least a thousand person-years to get this film made. There were so many animators. And they all seem to have done a painstaking job.

So, kudos to The Creator, the art with which it was made, and the themes that it tackled. Now get thee to a proper movie theater. In fact, the shiniest, newest, most up–to–date movie theater you can find. Movie theaters need our help to survive in this world of streaming, and spectacles like The Creator need to be seen on a big screen.

1 note · View note

wuxiaphoenix · 11 months

Text

Worldbuilding: Down the (Zodiac) Rabbit Hole

When you create a world, you can’t just take into account your readers’ suspension of disbelief. You have to consider that if characters run the spectrum of humanity, some of them will always be very, very curious about how the world works. And far more of them will be worried about how to predict what’s going to happen today, tomorrow, next week, next year. And most of all, try to predict how their interactions with other people will go. Because we are social animals (even if some of us only reluctantly) and if there’s an unprecedented disaster your survival may depend on whether or not someone you’ve never so much as spoken to hates your guts.

One of the ways people have tried to predict this for thousands of years is astrology.

I’m not talking about the quippy little horoscopes in some weekly papers, though those can be amusing. The study of serious astrology, whether you’re looking at Asian systems, the original European version from the Middle Ages and Renaissance, or something else, is, I’d say, at least as scientific as early economics. It involves astronomy, starwatching, and quite a bit of math. We wouldn’t have accurate calendars today without the foundations laid by astrology.

...And frankly, if European astrology had been taken seriously in the 1900s instead of condemned as “baseless superstition”, a few things might have been different. I ran across a book written by a serious astrologist who at one point cast Adolf Hitler’s horoscope in the light modern style too many people use today, and in the more sober and rigorous style of the Renaissance. I will sum up.

Light Modern: “Oh, fluffy harmless Taurus!”

Renaissance: “The position of Jupiter and Saturn in this man’s houses, along with other factors, means if he ever gets near power he will rise on a throne of skulls and drown cities in a wave of blood. If the subject of this reading is there in person, fake a sudden illness, slip out the back door, and leave town. Possibly leave the country. Avoid at all costs. This man is Death.”

Yeah. Talk about the possibilities for interesting alternate histories....

Long story short, I’m not saying you should take astrology seriously. I’m saying your characters might, and even if they don’t, they may have grown up with its assumptions. Taurus is a rock, Aries runs over you, Scorpio smiles until they stab you in the back. That kind of thing.

And it has real effects, if only because people will be looking for events and incidents that agree with what they “already know”. (Ask serious researchers about confirmation bias. But prepare to have your ears blistered.) People will assume that certain signs can work together, and others can’t, and those assumptions can make situations to the contrary much more difficult than they have to be. As in, yet another way a clever writer can up the tension!

Of course, you can be clever, but sometimes you’re just lucky. I gave Jason in Colors a specific birth year, which will to an astute reader be a clue that the book is set some years beyond our present time. And I knew how old Lee Cheong was, which given his part of the story starts in an alternate 1618, gives him a specific birth year. Ha-neul was born late in the year of the Water Dragon (1592), Chae was born in 1518, and given Mary is 14 at the story start I worked backwards to find her year, too.

Long story short? In the Korean system of Four Pillars, all of them have compatible years. (I’ll have to see what makes sense for Chin-sun.)

So. People will expect this group to work well together. Which is an interesting element, given half of them are foreigners. Chance favors the prepared writer!

#creative writing #worldbuilding #colors of another sky #astrology

5 notes · View notes

andrea-cliffe · 1 year

Text

Omens, Oracles, and Prophecies: A History of Divination

I’ve recently taken a course through EdX on divination. It is called “Omes, Oracles, and Prophecies,” for anyone interested. I thought I’d share my notes.

This is the Framework for Predictive Systems. It helps us classify and understand similarities and differences amongst predictive methods across time and cultures.

#Random

Inputs stem from naturally-occurring random processes

No systemic predictability

No human beings

“Spontaneous”

Must wait for unscheduled events before making a prediction

One can always debate just how “random” a system really is.

#Randomized

Inputs are results of processes that a human initiates for the purpose of producing a random outcome

Fraud or bias outcomes may occur if input devices do not actually produce random outcomes

Dice-like systems, bones, and “ifa” (involved small objects being moved around on a shaking tray

#Human

Inputs that come directly from the diviner or inputs that come from a source not discernible by anyone besides the diviner

Can be conceptualized as the diviner being a sort of “spokesperson” of the divine

#Non-Random

Inputs come from observations of any process thought to be repeating, predictable, or in some way knowable in a consistent fashion

One must be very careful to distinguish non-random inputs from an end-to-end “deterministic” predictive system

A fully deterministic predictive system is exemplified by the modern understanding of the theory of gravity

I.e. astrology relies on deterministic inputs (positions of planets) to make non-deterministic predictions based on humans’ reading of mystical portents

Predictive System

The box in the diagram labeled this can be thought of as the core instruction set (or algorithm) for making predictions using a particular system.

I.e. “If you observe A, predict B”

Almost no predictive system is this simple, and many rely heavily on the expertise and interpretive skills of the diviner

In more “scientific” predictive systems, we can clearly understand how observed inputs come together to form a predictive system.

I.e. F=ma is a predictive system: if we can observe mass and acceleration, then we can predict what force is

Unlike F=ma, other divination systems are sometimes a bit unknowable at this stage–someone observing from the outside looking in cannot always know how exactly the predictive system works

Sometimes, this is because it has a high level of complexity that requires years of training to understand

Observe

The first step to making and analyzing a prediction

The input that comes from the prediction system and is fed into the algorithm

In ancient prediction systems, this varied from the flight of birds to how a bone cracks, while in modern prediction systems, this varied from the observation of a planet’s location to the results of a survey asking someone who they intend to vote for in an upcoming election

Make Prediction

Once the observed inputs are processed through the predictive system, the practitioner will make a prediction

The definitiveness and clarity of the prediction varies from system to system

In the case of F=ma, there is no “wiggle room” in the prediction

In other cases, systems incorporate ambiguity, intentional or otherwise

Evaluate Accuracy

Evaluating the accuracy of the prediction

Was the prediction correct or not?

Often there can be a deeper level of complexity since there can be confusion when the prediction was accurate, but the process was not based on accurate facts

Make Changes

More of a recursive step than an ultimate goal–an idealized prediction system is never finalized, but is constantly making changes based on any observations that show imprecision in the prediction

Systems may also change and evolve without evaluating the accuracy of their predictions

Types of Divination

History of Astrology

History of Aztec Rituals

History of Casting Lots

History of Comets in Divination

History of Egyptian Statues in Divination

History of Haruspicy

History of Ifa

History of Maya Spacetime

History of Oracle Bones

The Oracle of Delphi

History of Roman Augury

History of Tarot

History of Tasseography

7 notes · View notes

duckielover151 · 1 year

Text

THE ONE PIECE DIARIES

Episode Count: 400

Holy crap. It's been so hard to hold out for the 400th episode to write an update. Everything just got crazy in the last 10 episodes or so. There are so many things to talk about! Strap in for a long one.

Okay. First. Sabaody. A location that is as beautiful as it is horrifying... Honestly, I feel like it took just a little too long for that fact to sink in for the crew. What part of Hachi's "Stand by and do nothing even if someone gets shot in front of you" warning was unclear that things are pretty fucked up here? The government's corruption has escalated even further with this new, up-close look at the human- (and other) trafficking and slavery system. It's honestly astonishing that anyone supports the World Government at this point.

And don't even get me started on the World Nobles. Never has a punch been more overdue yet so satisfying. I want them to storm into this so called "Holy Land" and just start beating up anyone they can find there too. (It's been a minute since I've talked about Enel, but have I mentioned how much I hate god complex characters?)

And then, of course, was the mass introduction of so many important characters... (Supernova is such a cool name for a group of rising stars... Maybe not totally, scientifically accurate... but cool.)

I recognize a lot of those names. The only one I really know much about is Law. I believe I've gotten basically his entire backstory, but I'm excited to see it play out in person, the little details I'm sure to have missed. Kid and Killer are also really familiar names, though I don't actually know that much about them.

I can definitely see why Law and Kid in particular come up so much in the fandom, if their introduction is anything to go by. That fight with the three captains fending off the Navy outside the auction house may not have been the most impressive fight in the series, but it was also a really fun spectacle. Kid, Luffy, and Law have already got a great sort of chemistry and dynamic, and I'm excited to see that grow.

There were a few others who stood out who I'm also looking forward to getting to know better... Jewelry Bonney is an interesting one. She seems to have the ability to age and de-age herself at will, which could be super useful... Though she doesn't seem much like the type for espionage... She seems like someone who really walks her own path. Some of these introductions were a little rushed, but I feel like hers was really good. They got in everything we needed to know about her, including her main policy of not getting caught up in anyone else's bullshit. And the Straw Hats seems to specialize in getting caught up in other people's problems... I'd like to see her team up with our crew... but I kind of get the feeling that she'll end up being an enemy, or at least a hostile rival, whenever they meet again.

Basil Hawkins is the other one who really stood out to me. He's another interesting one who I'm really not sure where he'll stand in the future. He has the potential to be either really cool or really annoying. Fortunetelling has the potential to be a fascinating ability... I'll be interested to see if he pairs it with another talent... and just how much he relies on it. His assurance that it wasn't his time to die because his cards told him so while his crewmate was panicking... isn't exactly reassuring. The concept of fate can be a tricky one in fiction. He seems like a character who might get shot down just to make a point if he relies on it too much.

And! I can't believe I almost forgot about Rayleigh.

Now, the huge backstory element that he revealed... That the Roger Pirates were never actually captured; Gol D. Roger turned himself in because he was already dying of some incurable illness... is something I already knew. But damn, those were some really great reveal scenes. Hell, Rayleigh's reveal scene, where they pause for just that extra second before adding that he's the former pirate king's vice captain (I think I prefer the term first mate, to be honest...) was really great. Kind of gave me the shivers even though I already knew who he was.

There were some really, really great moments throughout his story too... The one where he's reliving Roger's last words to him before turning himself in... It just struck me all of a sudden and made me kind of unexpectedly emotional... to realize that Rayleigh wasn't remembering the scene as his younger self. He was still the old man sitting at the table with the Straw Hats while Roger's comparative youth (and overall vibe) was frozen in time, as it always will be...

I think it really reinforced that Rayleigh's moved on and is living in the present, no matter how much he may have been affected by it at the time. But I think it also raises some questions. And comparisons.

We've already seen other characters meeting Luffy and being struck by the resemblance to Roger. But I think it's going to be these crews' differences that really stand out to me. Because if the Rogers are all still alive and well... it's almost a little disappointing that they're not still out there raising hell in their own ways, even if the crew's disbanded.

I just can't help pondering what it would be like if the roles were reversed. Because while I'm sure Luffy wouldn't want his crew to risk their lives for him... especially if they all knew he was already dying... I also can't picture it going down any other way than his friends storming the execution platform. After everything he's proven he's willing to do to save a friend... I can't help but feel the best way to honor him would be to live their lives by his example. I can't imagine this crew just fading into obscurity, even if they lost their captain.

But maybe that just has to do with the biggest mystery of all. Rayleigh basically comes right out and says that they were all changed forever by whatever they experienced at the end of their journey, whatever the One Piece is... And that they all made a choice when confronted with that knowledge. And maybe the Straw Hats will make a different choice once they find it.

And I sure wish I could say I would have had Robin and Luffy's resolve, to decide I wanted to find it myself, no matter how long that might take... But I probably would have cracked and demanded answers. Whenever it all does get revealed... I feel like the fandom's gonna explode.

#one piece #anime update #episode 400!#silvers rayleigh #he's got like 4 different tags on here...#gol d. roger #monkey d. luffy

2 notes · View notes

dravvingtreasurexmaps · 21 days

Text

Published 11:58am monday, April 8th

By Cameron Logsdon

===========================

Have you ever seen movie footage of a different planet? Would you like to see some real photographs taken by scientists and sattelites?====================

I would live to discuss a hypethesis of mine that"s been bugging me for a long time.

Did you know as Saturn is the second largest planet in the mily way solar system next to Jupiter. Multiple variables fall into place in reguards to the homeopathy and general status and charchteristic of the flora and fauna locale.

In every sci fi movie. They document how it may be possible to travel to another planet with the use of a flight craft or some sort of jet. Which will always be the case in reguards to space exploration, the final frontier. This is because a jet(especially a large one) would provide optimal conditions as well as making the proper nessessitiess available and provide comfort for long term travel and hyper sleep in the confines of space. Now that i've finished stating the obvious.

The term "space" being the inherently obvious term for all the blackness you see as you look out of the front of the jet windshield(cockpit; flightdeck) is quite accurate in fact. As all that blackness is basically just dark matter in a scientific allegorical sense.

If you pay attention to the surface of take mars for instance, in the new 2022 movie "Riddick". Mars , or the "red planet" is actually simplistic enough in it's own right to make for more of a simple ecosystem. We're actually quite scared to think of what may exist or be able to survive there because it is entirely possible to meet extraterrestrial life. The term extraterrestial meaning: sciences not indigenous to Earth. From it's simple martian atmosphere. It's atmosphere is even similar to that of Earth. lf you This term meaning, sciences not indigenous to Earth.

To back up this theory. Here's a collective of real photos taken by the hubble telescope, numerous sattleite photos and even rover photography from the 20'and xx rover mission Curiosity that landed on Mars in 2014. and yes I can absolutely show these phots and its legal because i ive in America and i know my basic human rights. This information is clearly available to the public and has been in conjunction with the United States first ammendment which states freedom of the press. This is a blog, I'm the one blogging. These photos are actually so easy to access even a child could access this information if he or she indeed felt so inclined.

What's even more interesting with the help of these very clear hd photographs is the view of the sky behind the moutains. It seems to have a greyish white tint to it. Indeed it could be a dust storm of sand. Or a micture of red earth. Maybe it's methane or perhaps nitrogen and helium mixture. Either way it would behoove most in the scientific community to reveal that a gas is present. But what if hypothetically Jupiter could be considered an alternative light source(like the sun, or more specfically, a sun) throughout the day being it is closer than Earth. And jupiter is technically in the way inherently based on its numerical proximity and celestial path. It is much larger than the sun relatively.

Think about it. If saturn can be visible as justa. Tiny dot to the human eye. Imagine have earth must look from saturn. Just a tiny little blue dot probably.

At certain times of the day any sort of blueish hew could suggest oxygen and even h20 may be attainable. Further delving in of resources suggest that polar ice caps may be forming there as well although, which would suggest that lakes could be found or maybe even a fresh water springs inside of caves could be possible hypothetically. The only way to find a cave though of course, would take a master rock climber and/or cave spelunking enthusiast.

Mars has been and continues to be a marvle among scientists and scholar alike, and continues to inspire and baffel many who wish to persue a career in space exploration or the profession of flying, or piloting a aeroplane(a pilot).

All sources found through microsoft image searches. Thanks for reading.

#spaceexploration #starship #aeroplanes #spacetheory #relativetheory #blackmatter #themoon #laluna #solarsystem #themilkywaygalaxy #realflightenthusiastjournalism

0 notes

natchitoches · 4 months

Text

It’s just no good. Burning calories. Life and eating is a secret coven gimmick as soon as you fall out of line with whatever was diet magic in the first place: all a sickness. They finally took out drug connections and light exercise to weight loss. It’s a good idea I guess. You can’t keep using pills and light exercise as an excuse to being a mouth and not even a stomach or a digestive system. People do that. Lie about it. Become strangers to life anyway. Ruin everything for everybody. Bah! (Liposuction? Oh you can’t claim my soul for that; I mean you’d have a solution anyway that you weren’t dealing with a hock society for coven humanity. People are supposed to be out in the open with their learned necessary habits. Not seeking open help for them as a routine process of being here. So ya, liposuction in my opinion I mean, is a cause and effect sequence maybe that has also gone as hock option to coven behaviouralism.)

But I predict that in the future, good advice pages like this — scroll down to see the exercise; I believe in nutritional information if it’s accurate. Otherwise nein. Also no. But so you eat a whopper and walk for nearly seven hours: let me tell you, it’s somebody’s way of being special. Most everyone else, nope. And seriously what if that ends? No more whoppers? Seriously?! That’s sickness, mental illness. It is. Speaking loudly through the outdoor at the BK while it orders everything and takes it to a coven unspoken — probably claiming to be a vegetarian refuge. And you know? Maybe it even is! That’s interesting enough but I couldn’t get myself off the rusted nail issues of some things about coven eating habitual societies. Seriously? Is eating a habitual issue or not? So it’s not habitual. So it has no coven but self decency. Well! That’s clever.

I believe, but this is only because I want to and it’s unusual to my mind that I’ll probably see it anyway — so why not believe in impossible things, right?! I believe that in the future, pages like this concerning the certain fact based scientific knowledge of diet related to exercise related to weight, will no longer hold truth to fact of reality. There will no longer be a real instance of seeing or believing or doing anything to relate consequences of orders of human habit to certain knowledge like people or even animals are twice made machines. Once to action and twice to corrected actions. There won’t be corrections for actions just more consequences. I really have no idea how that could turn out to letting anyone live! But I know people live by necessary habits and they can’t actually be living by fetish with habits. And that people have to enjoy their habits alone, not as a shared lump of clay. There’s no sensory apparatus or brain or metabolism or body made that way, excuse me or I’m seriously sorry; this is funny to me but I have to say it, not even in anyway.

And so what else? Habits will mean what they are and actions won’t necessarily be habits but time events that require reason. What then? I dunno.

From a fictional point of view you’d see people handling their lives from changed habitual status because they wouldn’t always have to have ready sanctimonious reactions for the causality of their twice misbegotten habits. They ate a whopper and didn’t walk for seven hours and proceeded to continue the evening with a pound each alone of pasta, then an extravagant salad and at least eight ounces of bread, besides non-alcoholic beverages. After that, anything might have happened. It never made a story more or less boring but that whoppers were mentioned perhaps for lunch. Maybe. Maybe not even.

So if life is a coven story and people get fat, when life is forgetful of consequence, people won’t get fat! These tables are not correct.

#Other

0 notes

emptymanuscript · 7 months

Text

After several rounds of elimination played with myself, I think I have convinced myself out of ten of the possible projects down to four legit contenders for NaNoWriMo next month.

The Luna & Bacall Supernatural Detective Agency

The Fairies' Graveyard

The Count of Earth

Goal-Go!

They're all fairly different projects.

The Luna & Bacall Supernatural Detective Agency is fairly straight forward Urban Fantasy. Fairly silly people in terrible situations. It's essentially a fish out of water story with the least qualified detectives imaginable dealing with the worst sort of criminals imaginable and just sort of bumbling through in spite of the fact that they would have been dead in chapter 2 if it was an even vaguely realistic story. It has the advantage that I've already written some of it, and I expect it will be the most 'ridiculous fun' of the choices. Luna (Loon) Khonsu and Rebecca (Betch) Bacall the bff MCs are ridiculous. They have no place in a serious story and they're just going to plow through it until the story they're in stops being serious.

The Fairies' Graveyard is a very not straight forward. It's still fantasy but it is a novel-in-stories. A bunch of interrelated short stories (which is its real appeal to me because I want to learn the art of the short story) that convey a greater whole between them, sort of like Futureland: Nine Stories of an Imminent World by Walter Mosley. It's thread is an alternate 'history' where Fae survivors of a massive catastrophe have to figure out how to live in permanent exile in the human world. It also has the advantage that I've already written some of it and I'm very interested in the literary 'fuck you' that makes up a decent portion of the connective cores of the whole. Unfortunately it is also the grimmest of the choices. While I do (currently) think it has a happy ending, it isn't meant to be a light or easy read. I don't particularly expect it to be fun or comfortable. The only funny thing is that it actually started life as a porno-fan-fic idea until I realized that I had written something FAR too serious to have it match up with the original concept.

The Count of Earth is a Space Opera. Very soft Sci-fi that is meant to feel a bit like a folktale in space. The far future equivalent of one of the longer tales out of One Thousand and One Nights. Probably more accurately one of the French fakes inserted by one of the translators. It's one of the oldest story ideas that I'm still interested in, since I first had the idea for it back in 2014. I've written the beginning several times. I know, generally, what I want the story to be, but I kinda just can't quite get it to sing. The real advantage of it in NaNoWriMo will be letting go of its singing voice and just getting it down. It's also the only one of the four with no magic in it. The only "magic" is advanced technology (FTL, Interplanetary communications, Artificial Intelligences, Orbital Bombardment, etc.) and a massive amount of money. It's also the only one where a romantic love story will be a major plot line, as Jun, the MC who is the titular Count, falls in love with the Princess (? the Daughter of a Sovereign of a state like a King who is below the ultimate Sovereign of his political union like an Emperor) Mayari, who is the daughter of his 'master's enemy. Which is a mixed bag since I enjoy romantic subplots but I'm terrible at them.

Goal-Go! is Progression (Science) Fantasy. It acknowledges itself as existing within a Sci-fi universe while mostly dealing with magic within the 'scientifically' generated simulation. Even the blatantly 'scientific' ideas, like the transfer of files between folders on different computer systems for instance, are handled like magic. It's definitely the 'biggest' project, as in requiring the most amount of work from me, even if it is actually meant to be a fairly quick and easy read. Since my central conceit is that Goal-Go! is a 3rd person Choose Your Own Adventure. A game within a game. I will have to work hard to avoid making Inception references. I'm fairly certain I can't actually write the full text in 30 days but I could probably set up what I thought of as the default storyline, the one I would expect most readers to choose. And start working on the branches off of that. It's also just an ambitiously complicated structural idea. The story isn't much. Pulling it off will be a phenomenal amount of work and it may just simply be too much for NaNoWriMo even in abridged form. I think I'm only even considering it because I wanna and because I don't see it as very likely that I'll commit to it without something like NaNoWriMo, just some huge push against the phenomenal weight of the project. I wanna do it but it is intimidating. I'm also just not sure how fun Goal-Go! will be. And it will kind of be a waste of time if it isn't fun. Fun is its justification for existing. Though it's a different kind of fun from The Luna & Bacall Supernatural Detective Agency. It's gamey fun instead of fool victorious fun. The constant task will be keeping it from bogging down which I think it will simply tend toward. I probably should just nix it for safety and say no. But. I do kinda still wanna.

All of which gets me not really any closer to deciding which of the four to actually do. They're all kind of different enough that it's hard to compare them and pick out what will be the "best" experience for me. Hmmmph. Decisions. Decisions.

#thinking out loud #nanowrimo

0 notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 3 years

Text

Machine learning's crumbling foundations

Technological debt is insidious, a kind of socio-infrastructural subprime crisis that’s unfolding around us in slow motion. Our digital infrastructure is built atop layers and layers and layers of code that’s insecure due to a combination of bad practices and bad frameworks.

Even people who write secure code import insecure libraries, or plug it into insecure authorization systems or databases. Like asbestos in the walls, this cruft has been fragmenting, drifting into our air a crumb at a time.

We ignored these, treating them as containable, little breaches and now the walls are rupturing and choking clouds of toxic waste are everywhere.

https://pluralistic.net/2021/07/27/gas-on-the-fire/#a-safe-place-for-dangerous-ideas

The infosec apocalypse was decades in the making. The machine learning apocalypse, on the other hand…

ML has serious, institutional problems, the kind of thing you’d expect in a nascent discipline, which you’d hope would be worked out before it went into wide deployment.

ML is rife with all forms of statistical malpractice — AND it’s being used for high-speed, high-stakes automated classification and decision-making, as if it was a proven science whose professional ethos had the sober gravitas you’d expect from, say, civil engineering.

Civil engineers spend a lot of time making sure the buildings and bridges they design don’t kill the people who use them. Machine learning?

Hundreds of ML teams built models to automate covid detection, and every single one was useless or worse.

https://pluralistic.net/2021/08/02/autoquack/#gigo

The ML models failed due to failure to observe basic statistical rigor. One common failure mode?

Treating data that was known to be of poor quality as if it was reliable because good data was not available.

Obtaining good data and/or cleaning up bad data is tedious, repetitive grunt-work. It’s unglamorous, time-consuming, and low-waged. Cleaning data is the equivalent of sterilizing surgical implements — vital, high-skilled, and invisible unless someone fails to do it.

It’s work performed by anonymous, low-waged adjuncts to the surgeon, who is the star of the show and who gets credit for the success of the operation.

The title of a Google Research team (Nithya Sambasivan et al) paper published in ACM CHI beautifully summarizes how this is playing out in ML: “Everyone wants to do the model work, not the data work: Data Cascades in High-Stakes AI,”

https://storage.googleapis.com/pub-tools-public-publication-data/pdf/0d556e45afc54afeb2eb6b51a9bc1827b9961ff4.pdf

The paper analyzes ML failures from a cross-section of high-stakes projects (health diagnostics, anti-poaching, etc) in East Africa, West Africa and India. They trace the failures of these projects to data-quality, and drill into the factors that caused the data problems.

The failures stem from a variety of causes. First, data-gathering and cleaning are low-waged, invisible, and thankless work. Front-line workers who produce the data — like medical professionals who have to do extra data-entry — are not compensated for extra work.

Often, no one even bothers to explain what the work is for. Some of the data-cleaning workers are atomized pieceworkers, such as those who work for Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, who lack both the context in which the data was gathered and the context for how it will be used.

This data is passed to model-builders, who lack related domain expertise. The hastily labeled X-ray of a broken bone, annotated by an unregarded and overworked radiologist, is passed onto a data-scientist who knows nothing about broken bones and can’t assess the labels.

This is an age-old problem in automation, pre-dating computer science and even computers. The “scientific management” craze that started in the 1880s saw technicians observing skilled workers with stopwatches and clipboards, then restructuring the workers’ jobs by fiat.

Rather than engaging in the anthropological work that Clifford Geertz called “thick description,” the management “scientists” discarded workers’ qualitative experience, then treated their own assessments as quantitative and thus empirical.

http://hypergeertz.jku.at/GeertzTexts/Thick_Description.htm

How long a task takes is empirical, but what you call a “task” is subjective. Computer scientists take quantitative measurements, but decide what to measure on the basis of subjective judgment. This empiricism-washing sleight of hand is endemic to ML’s claims of neutrality.

In the early 2000s, there was a movement to produce tools and training that would let domain experts produce their own tools — rather than delivering “requirements” to a programmer, a bookstore clerk or nurse or librarian could just make their own tools using Visual Basic.

This was the radical humanist version of “learn to code” — a call to seize the means of computation and program, rather than being programmed. Over time, it was watered down, and today it lives on as a weak call for domain experts to be included in production.

The disdain for the qualitative expertise of domain experts who produce data is a well-understood guilty secret within ML circles, embodied in Frederick Jelinek’s ironic talk, “Every time I fire a linguist, the performance of the speech recognizer goes up.”

But a thick understanding of context is vital to improving data-quality. Take the American “voting wars,” where GOP-affiliated vendors are brought in to purge voting rolls of duplicate entries — people who are registered to vote in more than one place.

These tools have a 99% false-positive rate.

Ninety. Nine. Percent.

To understand how they go so terribly wrong, you need a thick understanding of the context in which the data they analyze is produced.

https://5harad.com/papers/1p1v.pdf

The core assumption of these tools is that two people with the same name and date of birth are probably the same person.

But guess what month people named “June” are likely to be born in? Guess what birthday is shared by many people named “Noel” or “Carol”?

Many states represent unknown birthdays as “January 1,” or “January 1, 1901.” If you find someone on a voter roll whose birthday is represented as 1/1, you have no idea what their birthday is, and they almost certainly don’t share a birthday with other 1/1s.

But false positives aren’t evenly distributed. Ethnic groups whose surnames were assigned in recent history for tax-collection purposes (Ashkenazi Jews, Han Chinese, Koreans, etc) have a relatively small pool of surnames and a slightly larger pool of first names.

This is likewise true of the descendants of colonized and enslaved people, whose surnames were assigned to them for administrative purposes and see a high degree of overlap. When you see two voter rolls with a Juan Gomez born on Jan 1, you need to apply thick analysis.

Unless, of course, you don’t care about purging the people who are most likely to face structural impediments to voter registration (such as no local DMV office) and who are also likely to be racialized (for example, migrants whose names were changed at Ellis Island).

ML practitioners don’t merely use poor quality data when good quality data isn’t available — they also use the poor quality data to assess the resulting models. When you train an ML model, you hold back some of the training data for assessment purposes.

So maybe you start with 10,000 eye scans labeled for the presence of eye disease. You train your model with 9,000 scans and then ask the model to assess the remaining 1,000 scans to see whether it can make accurate classifications.

But if the data is no good, the assessment is also no good. As the paper’s authors put it, it’s important to “catch[] data errors using mechanisms specific to data validation, instead of using model performance as a proxy for data quality.”

ML practitioners studied for the paper — practitioners engaged in “high-stakes” model building reported that they had to gather their own data for their models through field partners, “a task which many admitted to being unprepared for.”

High-stakes ML work has inherited a host of sloppy practices from ad-tech, where ML saw its first boom. Ad-tech aims for “70–75% accuracy.”

That may be fine if you’re deciding whether to show someone an ad, but it’s a very different matter if you’re deciding whether someone needs treatment for an eye-disease that, untreated, will result in irreversible total blindness.

Even when models are useful at classifying input produced under present-day lab conditions, those conditions are subject to several kinds of “drift.”

For example, “hardware drift,” where models trained on images from pristine new cameras are asked to assess images produced by cameras from field clinics, where lenses are impossible to keep clean (see also “environmental drift” and “human drift”).

Bad data makes bad models. Bad models instruct people to make ineffective or harmful interventions. Those bad interventions produce more bad data, which is fed into more bad models — it’s a “data-cascade.”

GIGO — Garbage In, Garbage Out — was already a bedrock of statistical practice before the term was coined in 1957. Statistical analysis and inference cannot proceed from bad data.

Producing good data and validating data-sets are the kind of unsexy, undercompensated maintenance work that all infrastructure requires — and, as with other kinds of infrastructure, it is undervalued by journals, academic departments, funders, corporations and governments.

But all technological debts accrue punitive interest. The decision to operate on bad data because good data is in short supply isn’t like looking for your car-keys under the lamp-post — it’s like driving with untrustworthy brakes and a dirty windscreen.

Image: Seydelmann (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GW300_1.jpg

CC BY-SA: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en

Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

#pluralistic

116 notes · View notes

meichenxi · 3 years

Note

Ooh anything about linguistics and/or Chinese linguistics that interests you- what do you find most interesting?

Ooooo thank you! First let me apologise for the lack of rigour i.e. sources - I am ILL.

HMMMMM ok...let me talk a little bit about one thing I find fascinating - the idea of 'linguistic complexity'. It's an interesting topic that a) demonstrates the failures of linguistics that only takes Indo-European languages into account; b) demonstrates how a conflation of linguistic and moral judgements leads to absolute chaos; and c) proves that sometimes the purpose of all models and hypotheses is to be a useful aid in description, and not to be 100% accurate. Which means that multiple models can exist at the same time. Also, it shows just how cool Classical Chinese is.

I'm going to make this into two posts because I have been asked to wax lyrical on this stuff twice...this one will be a general overview of what linguistic complexity is and some of the issues around it, and the other post (@karolincki 's ask) will be an overview of these issues as pertaining to Modern and Classical Chinese.

Linguistic complexity: an introduction

What is linguistic complexity? Basically what it says on the tin: how 'simple' or 'complex' is one language in relation to another. If you automatically think that sounds dodgy - aren't all languages equally complex? what is a simple language? etc - just hold on. We'll get there.

A very important starting point: complexity here only refers to linguistic complexity. There are many ways to measure this, but broadly speaking it refers to the amount of stuff in a language a learner has to deal with. Are there genders? Well, that's more complex than not having any, because it's an extra thing to remember. Do you have to express whether the information you're conveying is something you personally experienced or hearsay? Again, more complex than not. Different tenses? Essentially, you can look at complexity like this: if you were describing this language or putting it into a computer program, what is the minimum length of description you would need? The longer the description, the more complex the language. In a standard understanding of complexity, a language like English is more complex than a language like Vietnamese (English has more tenses, moods, conjugations, irregularity...), and a language like Georgian is more complex than a language like English (Google a single verb table of Georgian and you will see what I mean).

(this will be long)

What complexity does not mean is anything to do with the cognitive abilities of the people who speak it. It doesn't mean that people who speak English are unable to conceive of the difference between a dual and a plural (2 apples and 3 apples), just because the language doesn't mark it. It doesn't mean people who speak Chinese are unable to conceive of the past conditional ('I should have gone...') just because they don't have a separate tense for it. It doesn't mean Italian speakers don't know whether they experienced the thing themselves, or heard about it from someone else, just because they don't have a set verb ending for it. All linguistic complexity means is what the language requires you to express.

I'm putting this out there very clearly because this sort of thinking is bound up in a lot of racist ideas and ideology. You'll have heard of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis? Unfortunately named, since they never really worked together, and Edward Sapir was actually a relatively cool dude for the time who argued against linguistic relativity - i.e. the language you speak determines how you think. Yes, in the 19th (and much of the 20th) century, when certain linguists referred to 'simple' and 'complex' languages that is what many of them meant: speakers of a simple language are 'simple', and a complex one are 'complex'. But there was a huge backlash against these racist ideas, and that backlash was hugely influential is shaping the direction of typology (the branch of linguistics which is broadly concerned with these sorts of questions). More on that later, but for now: please understand that when I say linguistic complexity, I am not implying a single thing about the people that speak it.

Back to complexity. Of course language, like any system, is made up of moving parts: you don't just need to consider how many parts it has, but also how interdependent they are, whether they interact with each other in a predictable way, how likely they are to change. You might also want to consider how easy the system is to learn for somebody who has never used it before. And then, of course, languages are more complex still because they are not machines, but ever-changing things: do you count a rule like the conditional inversion in English, which only applies to a total of three verbs? Is that less complex because fewer verbs use it - and therefore you need to think about it less - or does that make the system more complex because you need another, meta-rule to say when you need to use it and when not? What about irregularity? Is a language like English that doesn't have many rules but has a sizeable amount of 'irregular' verbs more or less complicated than a language like Swahili which has a lot more rules, but follows them assiduously? And what happens when some people use one rule and others don't - do you count those as the same language (lumping), which may render the grand overview less accurate, or do you count them as totally separate languages (splitting), in which case when do you stop?

Hmm. Complexity. Is. Complex.

Those are a lot of factors that need to be considered here. Even saying something is 'irregular' doesn't mean very much without further quantification. For example, if I say that the 'irregular' verb ring goes to ring, rang, rung in English, you can very easily find other verbs which conjugate similarly: sing, sang, sung etc. So is that really irregular? Or is it just another, less productive rule? But then if it's a rule, why do we say fling, flung, flung and not yesterday I flang the ball? What's going on???

And what about 'total' irregularity, so called 'suppletion', where (and this is a very scientific explanation) a random non-related word just seems to appear in a paradigm, like it's got lost on the way home? Like I go, I went; like to be, I am, he is, I were; like good, better, best. Ok, so is the irregularity in I go and I went somehow....more irregular than irregularity in I sing and I sang? Uhh. Ok. And then is the irregularity in bad, worse, worst somehow more irregular than better and best, because at least for better and best you can see the -er and -st endings?? Finally, what about a 'spoken' but very predictable irregularity, such as the way we have a reduced vowel in 'says'? Where do we count that? Is that more irregular, or less irregular? Is it maybe 33% irregular?

I think you get the point. And of course all of this becomes more complex when you start to consider the interaction of lots of different systems at once. What about tone? If you have regular tone like Chinese, most people would agree that it's more complex because it's an added thing. But tone probably only developed in part as a response to losing some really important sound contrasts that other languages have kept...and also there is no possibilities of 'irregularities' in tone the way there are in something like verb conjugation...you can't just have a random sixth tone. And then what about syntax? If you have lots of very complex word ordering rules, is that more or less complex than a language where you have to rely on the human being to use pragmatics to infer what the ever loving fuck is going on?

Yeah. This is sort of just one of those things where every year a new linguist comes up with a spicy new matrix to 'measure' complexity and then everyone shits on them in journals and then comes up with their own idea which is promptly shat on. I don't know either.

Ok, so how is this relevant to Chinese?

To answer that question we need to circle round a bit to the history of typology that I vaguely alluded to earlier. At various points - depending on how racist the linguist in question was - people in the 20th century were starting to realise that all of this stuff about 'complex language = complex civilisation / complex thought' wasn't quite as water-tight as they'd hoped. Perhaps it was their better judgement, but it's also likely to have been influenced by a lot of contact suddenly with Native American languages - many of which are vastly complex by literally any metric you could possibly imagine, but the people speaking them were not colonising other countries and building amphitheatres and all of those necessarily, comfortingly European ideas of 'civilisation'. This movement away from such racist ideology, even if it was fuelled in part by a different type of racism, meant that suddenly everyone was very wary about making statements about linguistic complexity at all. It smacked of all the things they were trying not to be associated with.

I'm going to quote some Edward Sapir here for no other reason than I think it's really unfortunate that he's most famous for something that has the potential for incredibly racist ideology that he literally never said:

'Intermingled with this scientific prejudice and largely anticipating it was another, a more human one. The vast majority of linguistic theorists themselves spoke languages of a certain type, of which the most fully developed varieties were the Latin and Greek that they had learned in their childhood. It was not difficult for them to be persuaded that these familiar languages represented the “highest” development that speech had yet attained and that all other types were but steps on the way to this beloved “inflective” type. Whatever conformed to the pattern of Sanskrit and Greek and Latin and German was accepted as expressive of the “highest,” whatever departed from it was frowned upon as a shortcoming or was at best an interesting aberration. Now any classification that starts with preconceived values or that works up to sentimental satisfactions is self-condemned as unscientific. A linguist that insists on talking about the Latin type of morphology as though it were necessarily the high-water mark of linguistic development is like the zoölogist that sees in the organic world a huge conspiracy to evolve the race-horse or the Jersey cow.'

People generally began to get the hang of it after this, and stepped away from linguistic classification at all. There was a broad consensus that that sort of thing was done with, a thing of the past. It's kind of funny, because of course people's unwillingness to look at the complexity of language because 'all people are the same' shows that they still think language and culture/cognition are intimately linked! It was done out of a desire to not be racist, but you can't even reach that conclusion unless you have a sneaky secret bit of bioessentialism going on in your sneaky little brain. Because if the complexity of language doesn't reflect the complexity of your thought, why would it matter whether some systems are bigger than others? That they had more parts?

It literally wouldn't matter at all..

So what happened next? Linguists started to revisit these old linguistic classifications and ideas of complexity, but in the hope of proving, instead, that actually all languages were equal. You can definitely see the theoretical aims here: not only is a good from an ideological point of view (again, if you still equate linguistic complexity to complexity of thought), but it's also quite handy if you believe that all human babies approach language learning with the same biological apparatus ('Universal Grammar', if you believe in that, and other cognitive principles). If all babies have the same built-in gear, you sort of want the task they are given to be of roughly the same magnitude. That's one of those things linguists like to call theoretically desirable - which just means it would be neat if it did.

We're getting to Chinese. I promise.

So how you could make systems so vastly different as English and Georgian and Chinese roughly the 'same' level of complexity? One answer is irregularity: languages with huuuuuge verb and noun declensions like Georgian tend to have very little irregularity, where languages with less extensive systems like English tend to keep it around for longer. There are lots of reasons for this I won't go into, but it's a general trend. Irregular systems are more work for the brain to remember, which, predictably, is more 'complex' for a learner to acquire. Compare a language like English and German: German may have more cases and declensions and rules, but once you learn them...that's it. Compare that to English, where you'll be learning phrasal verbs and prepositions as a second language learner until the day you die (and possibly beyond). It's a different type of 'complex', but it's still deserving of the title.

That obviously doesn't work for a language like Chinese. Chinese has no conjugations, and so can't possibly have any irregularity in the same way. But fear not: there are lots and lots and lots of ways in which languages often exhibit what might be called 'complexity tradeoffs': languages with complex tone, for example, almost always have simpler sound systems elsewhere, and many languages with complex case arrangements tend to have free word order. One thing is complex, another...simplex (a word unfortunately genuinely in use).

This seems nice. We like this. It means that the different parts of the same system may be differently sized, but the whole system in total is about the same as any of other language. There’s just one problem: this isn’t how languages seem to work.

For every example of a complexity trade-off you can find, there are other languages which don’t have any such ‘trade off’ at all. There are plenty of languages where grammar is complex and the sound system is complex; or languages like Icelandic and German where there are cases but fairly rigid and fixed word order; or other cases where there is a huge amount of irregularity but also crazy verb systems, and so on. A language like Abkhaz has supposedly 58 consonants in the literary dialect: but it also has insanely complicated grammar. No trade-off there. Finally, it has long been presumed that whilst verb morphology etc is simpler in languages like Chinese, syntax would be more complicated: recently, a number of studies have proved exactly the opposite. Both, in fact, are simpler.

In conclusion, where does this leave us? Whilst the idea behind complexity trade-offs is well-motivated but not totally sound, and whilst these do not always seem to be present in the way you might hope, what this does do is force us as linguists to question whether we have spent enough time considering the types of complexity that are present in languages like Chinese, and how we reconcile that with more ‘familiar’ complexity. It’s interesting to think about because it shows what happens when you fail to consider these things.

That’s all for the overview on linguistic complexity today!! I’ll talk specifically about complexity in Chinese in the next ask, because this is already very long. Be aware, I’m not going to give you any answers necessarily - these questions are way above my pay grade - but boy can I give you some thoughts.

#chinese #linguistics #langblr #lingblr #linguistic complexity #meichenxi manages #askies #oh my god I am so looking forward to writing the next one #it's so spicy #love remembering that I actually sometimes know things lmao #stop the false equivalence of Sapir = the Sapir-whorf hypothesis 2k21 #the dude was actually quite progressive for his time #sighhhhh *squints at actual linguistics* hope this doesn't awaken anything in me #like the desire to go and do a masters #I hope this makes sense and I hope no one yells at me #if you want any sources I'm happy to give I'm just lazy and ill #source = brain #no I really do have books I promise

58 notes · View notes

pharmdup · 3 years

Note

so, alright, ive followed your blog for a while because it's really interesting! i'm two years into a general biology degree, and ive been trying to figure out what i want to do with it. turns out that almost all of my classes thus far would transfer to a degree in medicinal chemistry, and ive recently been really really eyeing pharmacy as an endgoal (Pharm.D, i always intended to get a phd or doctorate eventually so it's not that much different of an expectation). is there anything you'd want to tell someone before they get into pharmacy as a career path? i enjoy working in a lab but i also think that i could do a lot of good somewhere like a hospital or clinic, or something similar. sorry for the unsolicited request for advice, feel free to ignore it!

Thank you for the follow!

I’ve gotta say, I do love being a pharmacist, and I do a lot of good in my hospital and clinic, even though the powers that be and the system in general try to prevent me from doing that good a lot of the time.

I’m a bit tired just now, and tumblr feels casual, so I’m going to give you a bullet point list of advice to see if any of this helps. I might add more later, and encourage other pharmacists to chime in.

There are too many pharmacists. The pharmacy schools are graduating many many more pharmacists than the market can bear. Wages are dropping, and pharmacists are getting laid off since it’s cheaper to hire new grads.

A decade or two ago, there was a shortage of pharmacists, so a lot of people went into pharmacy thinking that in six years they’d get a doctorate and start earning six figures. These pharmacists often really don’t care that much about pharmacy, don’t care to remain clinically adept, and they’re your peers. It can drag you down.

I really hope the students who are entering school now are doing so because they love pharmacy, just like me.

Fewer people are applying to pharmacy school, which means that you should absolutely apply to top schools, no matter how bad you think your chances are. Expect good scholarships.

Go to a public university with a long, prestigious history, and don’t even apply to a school whose NAPLEX pass rates are less than 90%.

Avoid for-profit and/or three year programs. Avoid programs that expect the student to arrange their own rotations like the plague.

How easily you understand your biochemistry class will predict how well you do in pharmacy school.

In general, there’s a culture among healthcare professionals to bully pharmacists. Prescribers are often not inclined to welcome your help. Nurses think we’re idiots and will make fun of us to our faces as if we’re not human beings. You’ll be faced with a lot of ethical quandaries about protecting a patient when their doctor hangs up the phone on you. You’ll have to decide if you can be emotionally resilient in the face of that. I happen to enjoy subtly manipulating prescribers (many of whom are my friends now), and I like imagining I’m the underdog hero, saving the day for my patients despite the slings and arrows from the other health professions, so it works out.

Do everything that you can to avoid working in a retail chain pharmacy. Intern at a hospital. Work for an independent pharmacy. Do a residency. Pharmacy can shatter all of our souls, but retail chains do it quickly while putting patients at risk.

If you want to work in a hospital or clinic, or maybe even something unusual like a drug info service, poison control, etc, consider making board certification a goal, to maintain your competency and to show what you’ve worked toward. Residency is the easiest way to get this, but you don’t have to.

Right now, see if you can shadow pharmacists in different practice settings to make sure it’s something you really want to do.

Nobody in the healthcare team can dispense drugs as safely and accurately as the pharmacist (though, confusingly, other healthcare professionals act as though this is a useless skill). Don’t go into pharmacy if you see yourself as only a clinical pharmacist and don’t want to take the drug dispensing bit very, very seriously. Someday, after many years of training, you may have the privilege of signing your initials on a label. You should strive to have your initials mean absolute accuracy every single time. It should mean something to you every single time, no matter how many outside pressures will try to whisper that it’s easier if you let it slide just once.

You will be the very last line of defense for the patient, and you must remain aware of that, and not allow yourself to be intimidated by how the physicians will always know the patient better than you, and will often know the science better than you. You still have to speak up, even knowing that you may sound foolish every time.

If you read all of this and still want to do it, then I hope you do. We need more pharmacists who love it, who love and have pride in our humble role, who are willing to spend their evenings looking up a few more scientific articles in the evening to help that one patient’s difficult health problems the next day.

My final thought: patients make decisions about their healthcare that often aren’t what you would choose to do, or aren’t what science would encourage them to do. The ultimate authority on what is best for a patient is always that patient. Working in healthcare places you in a role of enormous power and privilege. Patients have the right to direct choices about their own bodies and you will need to always respect that. The very best of us never disrespect the sacred trust that our patients place in us, not even when they’re not around to see it.

#pharmblr #asks

140 notes · View notes