ZThemes
Next

When that one person logs on

didtheydiddleyet:

image

image

It’s not cute or gracefull either it’s as if you actually body slammed into them its uncomfortable and painfull

aaron2point0:

throughthefeathers:

zekedms:

black-australia:

A list of all massacres of Indigenous Australians that happened in Victoria. I feel this information needs to be shared as people don’t know nearly enough about Indigenous Australians and do not know how horribly we were and still are treated. Nothing else needs to be said as the list tells it all. Click the photos to save a bigger image for reading the list clearly. 

Photo/display credit: Brambuk - The National Park & Cultural Centre.

68 massacres, in an EIGHTEEN YEAR PERIOD.

That’s not start to end, that’s just a little fucking slice.

18 years.

That’s birth to adulthood. Thousands of your cousins, slaughtered for no reason other than white people considering them inferior.

Nobody knows loss like native people.

Nobody.

Words can not describe how much damage white people have done to natives.

This is horrifying…. 

chaz-gelf:

sixmilliondeadinternets:

Gandhi has been historically the most aggressive character in Civilization due to an original bug in the first game that caused him to go all-out once he reaches democracy. They just kept the thing going ever since.


To further explain this bug, because I was chatting with mothmonarch about Civilization and other strategy games last night and I never got around to explaining this fully, but I love this story:
Gandhi’s AI in the original game had its aggression set to the absolute minimum (0 on a scale of 0 to 10, I believe, I may have this wrong but the basic idea I’m about to explain is accurate, as far as I can tell). Adopting democracy lowers an AI civ’s aggression by 2 points, so when someone who is fully peaceful loses two points of aggression, they should still be nice and polite, right?
Except this is an old DOS game, and so computer math is in place. What actually happened was that Gandhi’s aggression level ticked backwards two steps, from 0 to 255. On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.
And that’s the story as I recall it, but again I may have gotten some details wrong, so feel free to correct me! After that, as the original poster said, the devs loved the bug so much that they just kept it in as a running joke!

chaz-gelf:

sixmilliondeadinternets:

Gandhi has been historically the most aggressive character in Civilization due to an original bug in the first game that caused him to go all-out once he reaches democracy. They just kept the thing going ever since.

To further explain this bug, because I was chatting with mothmonarch about Civilization and other strategy games last night and I never got around to explaining this fully, but I love this story:

Gandhi’s AI in the original game had its aggression set to the absolute minimum (0 on a scale of 0 to 10, I believe, I may have this wrong but the basic idea I’m about to explain is accurate, as far as I can tell). Adopting democracy lowers an AI civ’s aggression by 2 points, so when someone who is fully peaceful loses two points of aggression, they should still be nice and polite, right?

Except this is an old DOS game, and so computer math is in place. What actually happened was that Gandhi’s aggression level ticked backwards two steps, from 0 to 255On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.

And that’s the story as I recall it, but again I may have gotten some details wrong, so feel free to correct me! After that, as the original poster said, the devs loved the bug so much that they just kept it in as a running joke!

beantownbailout:

mustaleski:

matildathedragonfly:

knownorwegian:

In Norwegian, you don’t refer to your romantic partner as a “boyfriend” or “girlfriend”. You say “kjæreste”, which is gender neutral and literally translates to “the dearest”.

and in swedish you refer to your boyfriend/girlfriend by saying ”älskling” which translates into ”my beloved one” 

And in Finnish we say “mulkvisti” which means “one I don’t hate as much as the others”

*squints at finland*

godtie:

my boyfriend is in school to be a pharmacist 

astolat:

titleknown:

freedominwickedness:

101st-analborne:

fallbeil:

mugenstyle:

eccecorinna:

wrathofprawn:

for those not in the know, night witches were russian lady bombers who bombed the shit out of german lines in WW2. Thing is though, they had the oldest, noisiest, crappest planes in the entire world. The engines used to conk out halfway through their missions, so they had to climb out on the wings mid flight to restart the props. the planes were also so noisy that to stop germans from hearing them combing and starting up their anti aircraft guns, they’d climb up to a certain height, coast down to german positions, drop their bombs, restart their engines in midair, and get the fuck out of dodge.
their leader flew over 200 missions and was never captured.

how the fuck is this not taught in every single history class ever



pilots (◡‿◡✿) 
girl pilots (◕‿◕✿)
girl pilots killing nazis ✧・゚: *✧・゚:* \(◕ヮ◕✿)/ *:・゚✧*:・゚✧

But, remember, women never did anything in history.

This is laughably incorrect.
Fact 1: Although technologically obsolete as of WWII, the Polikarpov Po-2 “Kukuruznik” biplanes flown by the 588th Night Bomber Regiment were in no way ” the oldest, noisiest, crappest planes in the entire world.” The Po-2 was first flown in 1929 and remained in production until 1953 due to its low cost and extreme reliability. It is, in fact, the second most produced aircraft in history, and the most produced biplane in history. The night bombers flew brand new, specially modified Po-2s fitted with bomb racks and machine guns.
Fact 2: The Po-2 was extremely quiet; Germans nicknamed it the Nähmaschine (“sewing machine”) due to the muted rattling sound its tiny little 99-horsepower radial engine made. The night bombers would fly these quiet little planes just a few meters off the ground, then climb to higher altitude, cut the engine, and glide to the attack point so that the Germans would have no warning of an incoming attack other than wind whistling through the wing bracing-wires. It wasn’t because the engines were unreliable, it was a planned attack pattern.
Fact 3: Saying “their leader flew over 200 missions” is both inaccurate and damning with faint praise. Whereas most combat pilots fly only one or two sorties per day, all of the 588th Night Bomber Regiment pilots flew multiple missions every night, with the record being eighteen missions flown back-to-back-to-back-to-back in a single night. By the end of the war, most of the “Night Witches” had around a thousand combat sorties under their belts.
The Night Witches were THAT fucking badass, and it pisses me off when people get it all wrong because they’re too damn lazy to do their homework.

And this is one of the rare times the correction makes things more badass.

Wow, I now totally want to write the Temeraire-universe story of this regiment.
NIGHT WITCHES <3 <3 <3  

astolat:

titleknown:

freedominwickedness:

101st-analborne:

fallbeil:

mugenstyle:

eccecorinna:

wrathofprawn:

for those not in the know, night witches were russian lady bombers who bombed the shit out of german lines in WW2. Thing is though, they had the oldest, noisiest, crappest planes in the entire world. The engines used to conk out halfway through their missions, so they had to climb out on the wings mid flight to restart the props. the planes were also so noisy that to stop germans from hearing them combing and starting up their anti aircraft guns, they’d climb up to a certain height, coast down to german positions, drop their bombs, restart their engines in midair, and get the fuck out of dodge.

their leader flew over 200 missions and was never captured.

how the fuck is this not taught in every single history class ever

pilots (◡‿◡✿) 

girl pilots (◕◕✿)

girl pilots killing nazis ✧・゚: *✧・゚:* \(◕◕✿)/ *:・゚✧*:・゚✧

But, remember, women never did anything in history.

This is laughably incorrect.

Fact 1: Although technologically obsolete as of WWII, the Polikarpov Po-2 “Kukuruznik” biplanes flown by the 588th Night Bomber Regiment were in no way ” the oldest, noisiest, crappest planes in the entire world.” The Po-2 was first flown in 1929 and remained in production until 1953 due to its low cost and extreme reliability. It is, in fact, the second most produced aircraft in history, and the most produced biplane in history. The night bombers flew brand new, specially modified Po-2s fitted with bomb racks and machine guns.

Fact 2: The Po-2 was extremely quiet; Germans nicknamed it the Nähmaschine (“sewing machine”) due to the muted rattling sound its tiny little 99-horsepower radial engine made. The night bombers would fly these quiet little planes just a few meters off the ground, then climb to higher altitude, cut the engine, and glide to the attack point so that the Germans would have no warning of an incoming attack other than wind whistling through the wing bracing-wires. It wasn’t because the engines were unreliable, it was a planned attack pattern.

Fact 3: Saying “their leader flew over 200 missions” is both inaccurate and damning with faint praise. Whereas most combat pilots fly only one or two sorties per day, all of the 588th Night Bomber Regiment pilots flew multiple missions every night, with the record being eighteen missions flown back-to-back-to-back-to-back in a single night. By the end of the war, most of the “Night Witches” had around a thousand combat sorties under their belts.

The Night Witches were THAT fucking badass, and it pisses me off when people get it all wrong because they’re too damn lazy to do their homework.

And this is one of the rare times the correction makes things more badass.

Wow, I now totally want to write the Temeraire-universe story of this regiment.

NIGHT WITCHES <3 <3 <3  

kirstielovesart:

thevirginharry:

remember swine flu reblog if ur a tru 2009 kid

People were practically drinking hand sanitizer during that shit

If I’m in Avengers 2, everyone will know it ‘cause I’m gonna run through Times Square butt ass naked with Avengers 2 tattooed across my chest.

(

Anthony Mackie, on whether Marvel could keep him being in AVENGERS 2 secret (x)

(via aceraleigh)

)
abaldwin360:

neurosciencestuff:

Brain scans link concern for justice with reason, not emotion
People who care about justice are swayed more by reason than emotion, according to new brain scan research from the Department of Psychology and Center for Cognitive and Social Neuroscience.
Psychologists have found that some individuals react more strongly than others to situations that invoke a sense of justice—for example, seeing a person being treated unfairly or mercifully. The new study used brain scans to analyze the thought processes of people with high “justice sensitivity.”
“We were interested to examine how individual differences about justice and fairness are represented in the brain to better understand the contribution of emotion and cognition in moral judgment,” explained lead author Jean Decety, the Irving B. Harris Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry.    
Using a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain-scanning device, the team studied what happened in the participants’ brains as they judged videos depicting behavior that was morally good or bad. For example, they saw a person put money in a beggar’s cup or kick the beggar’s cup away. The participants were asked to rate on a scale how much they would blame or praise the actor seen in the video. People in the study also completed questionnaires that assessed cognitive and emotional empathy, as well as their justice sensitivity.
As expected, study participants who scored high on the justice sensitivity questionnaire assigned significantly more blame when they were evaluating scenes of harm, Decety said. They also registered more praise for scenes showing a person helping another individual.
But the brain imaging also yielded surprises. During the behavior-evaluation exercise, people with high justice sensitivity showed more activity than average participants in parts of the brain associated with higher-order cognition. Brain areas commonly linked with emotional processing were not affected.
The conclusion was clear, Decety said: “Individuals who are sensitive to justice and fairness do not seem to be emotionally driven. Rather, they are cognitively driven.” 
According to Decety, one implication is that the search for justice and the moral missions of human rights organizations and others do not come primarily from sentimental motivations, as they are often portrayed. Instead, that drive may have more to do with sophisticated analysis and mental calculation.
Decety adds that evaluating good actions elicited relatively high activity in the region of the brain involved in decision-making, motivation and rewards. This finding suggests that perhaps individuals make judgments about behavior based on how they process the reward value of good actions as compared to bad actions.
“Our results provide some of the first evidence for the role of justice sensitivity in enhancing neural processing of moral information in specific components of the brain network involved in moral judgment,” Decety said.

So, can the folks who always equate those of use who talk about these things to “being emotional” or “appealing to emotion” shut the fuck up now?

abaldwin360:

neurosciencestuff:

Brain scans link concern for justice with reason, not emotion

People who care about justice are swayed more by reason than emotion, according to new brain scan research from the Department of Psychology and Center for Cognitive and Social Neuroscience.

Psychologists have found that some individuals react more strongly than others to situations that invoke a sense of justice—for example, seeing a person being treated unfairly or mercifully. The new study used brain scans to analyze the thought processes of people with high “justice sensitivity.”

“We were interested to examine how individual differences about justice and fairness are represented in the brain to better understand the contribution of emotion and cognition in moral judgment,” explained lead author Jean Decety, the Irving B. Harris Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry.    

Using a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain-scanning device, the team studied what happened in the participants’ brains as they judged videos depicting behavior that was morally good or bad. For example, they saw a person put money in a beggar’s cup or kick the beggar’s cup away. The participants were asked to rate on a scale how much they would blame or praise the actor seen in the video. People in the study also completed questionnaires that assessed cognitive and emotional empathy, as well as their justice sensitivity.

As expected, study participants who scored high on the justice sensitivity questionnaire assigned significantly more blame when they were evaluating scenes of harm, Decety said. They also registered more praise for scenes showing a person helping another individual.

But the brain imaging also yielded surprises. During the behavior-evaluation exercise, people with high justice sensitivity showed more activity than average participants in parts of the brain associated with higher-order cognition. Brain areas commonly linked with emotional processing were not affected.

The conclusion was clear, Decety said: “Individuals who are sensitive to justice and fairness do not seem to be emotionally driven. Rather, they are cognitively driven.” 

According to Decety, one implication is that the search for justice and the moral missions of human rights organizations and others do not come primarily from sentimental motivations, as they are often portrayed. Instead, that drive may have more to do with sophisticated analysis and mental calculation.

Decety adds that evaluating good actions elicited relatively high activity in the region of the brain involved in decision-making, motivation and rewards. This finding suggests that perhaps individuals make judgments about behavior based on how they process the reward value of good actions as compared to bad actions.

“Our results provide some of the first evidence for the role of justice sensitivity in enhancing neural processing of moral information in specific components of the brain network involved in moral judgment,” Decety said.

So, can the folks who always equate those of use who talk about these things to “being emotional” or “appealing to emotion” shut the fuck up now?

cerseiscrown:

one of my favorite things about fandom is that the exchange of intellectual and creative property is a legitimate form of gift giving. like ‘i’m so enchanted by you, i love you, let me tell you a story’