💬 0 🔁 164 ❤️ 207

feisar: > I want to see the fall of LinkedIn during my lifetime

derinthescarletpescatarian: > theothin: > >> lizardsfromspace: >> >>> lizardsfromspace: >>> >>>> A lot of celebrity callouts these days are written by people who seem unacquainted with employment bc they’re full of odd reaches like “did you know the CEO of the international corporation that they work with is problematic?” and like. Did you know the celebrity you’re talking about probably doesn’t even know that guy’s name and also why are we assuming if people are exposed to someone problematic for two seconds they must endorse everything they do & say forever >>> >>> “Their co-star is problematic!” >>> >>> GASP! They found out someone at their job was a _bad person_ and they didn’t immediately storm into their boss’ office to quit and give a big Sorkin speech about it? We all know when you discover someone you work with sucks your two options are that, or bowing to them & saying “I agree with you 100% on everything now until the day I die. Because I’m your co-worker and that’s how that works” >> >> I remember seeing someone criticize a person for working for amazon. as a reason to consider them culpable for amazon’s exploitative practices towards their workers. while working in one of those exploited positions

medichamcham: > i really enjoy looking through reddit threads related to death metal because the replies sound like a groupchat for cartoon villains

msasterisk: > the-pink-bunny: > >> peachdelta: >> >>> prokopetz: >>> >>>> One of those goofy maid animes, except the viewpoint character isn’t the hapless master or mistress of the house, but a regular-ass janitor who ended up on this crew due to a paperwork mixup at the temp agency and can’t figure out what the fuck is wrong with her co-workers. >>> >>> sweep sweep sweep pales in the face of the windsor versamatic 14 >> >> ALT > > and they were yuri…

💬 13 🔁 17357 ❤️ 21142

carbomcoco: > carbomcoco: > >> “these researchers published a paper on something that literally any of us could have told you 🙄” ok well my supervisors wont let me write something in my thesis unless I can back it up with a citation so maybe it’s a good thing that they’re amplifying your voice to the scientific community in a way that prevents people from writing off your experiences as annecdotal evidence > > they did the research in the first place because they believed you and wanted to tell people about it. they are not our enemies.

cheesetitan: > trans-axolotl: > >> why does the “pour milk on your eyes for tear gas exposure” myth pop up like clockwork every time…please do not do that please only do eye flushes with water. please please please > > Because it used to be a common strategy against pepper spray because in theory it does work pretty good for pepper spray ONLY, but it has risks and strategies have evolved away from it. Basically milk has a lot of fat, pepper spray is an oil based spray. The fats from the milk bind the oils and wash them away more effectively than water or saline solution but turns out saline solution is still more than good enough and has no risks. > > Another issue is: tear gas. Tear gas is a powder, it is not oil based, milk has no benefits when facing tear gas. Tear gas has been increasingly used over the past years in protests over pepper spray. That is a more or less new development, which is why the strategy changed to using water/ saline solution too. > > > > > ## Tl;DR: Not a myth, just an outdated strategy so that’s why it keeps popping up. Use water or saline solution to wash out eyes after being hit with pepper spray or tear gas! You can add washing out with soap to better counteract pepper spray specifically. And rinse yourself, your clothes, anything that was hit in the shower or outside too before touching anything after you are back home or throw those objects away if possible. Focus on eyes and hands as first aid.

serendipitously i genuinely love cookies and all baked goods a lot which makes the content research process very enjoyable orteil42: > whatever man

hbmmaster: > red880: > >> hbmmaster: >> >>> hbmmaster: >>> >>>> hbmmaster: >>>> >>>>> I’m sure false etymology posts aren’t like actually more common than any other type of misinformation on this website, it just happens to be a type of misinformation I’m better at spotting and a type of misinformation that shows up in the type of posts people I follow tend to reblog. but dang false etymology posts sure are common >>>> >>>> tips for spotting false etymology: >>>> >>>> 1. if you happen to know what common greek and latin roots mean you can spot someone mistranslating them, which comes in handy very often >>>> 2. normal sounding words are almost never coined as acronyms. if someone claims something is an acronym you should literally always fact check it >>>> 3. sometimes the story presented by a proposed etymology falls apart if you like. think about it. why would a hypothetical continent be named after an animal speculated to not live there? why would an idiom’s original form be something that very obviously sounds like something you’d say as a comeback to the version everyone already knows? >>>> 4. that one happens enough to get its own numbered point on this list, if someone claims a common expression is the “short version” of another older phrase that means the opposite thing they are either lying or uncritically repeating something they saw on tumblr once. you almost don’t even need to fact check this, you can just assume they’re wrong >>>> >>> >>> _does_ it happen? name an example >> >> A Few Bad Apples [Spoils the Bunch] > > is “a few bad apples” an idiom with the opposite meaning of “a few bad apples spoil the bunch” > > no, “a few bad apples” isn’t even an idiomno, “a few bad apples” on its own implies “spoil the bunch”yes, “a few bad apples” on its own means smth different from “spoil the bunch”no for some other reasonyes for some other reason[show results]

💬 0 🔁 15513 ❤️ 22440

averyterrible: > averyterrible: > >> The children’s show villain is a figure who sadly is not seen outside the children’s show. There are few stock characters who as succinctly declare, from sheer stage presence, “the world is unloveable and it is painful to live here; that which delights mankind is like ash on my tongue” without being too fucking whiny about it. > > maladaptive suicidal ideation: “i’m going to kill myself” > > productive, growth mindset: “i’m going to steal all the instruments from Musictown!”

orteil42: > controversial inventor of cheese-shaped car drives wedge between consumers

prokopetz: > “OP do you mean that ironically” I never mean it ironically. That I acknowledge that a lot of my favourite media is shit doesn’t mean my appreciation isn’t genuine.

minyicho: > ALT > > ALT > > ALT > > ALT > > ALT > > honourable mentions > > ALT > > ALT

teaboot: > sapphic-and-stupid: > >> naamahdarling: >> >>> That has to be _the_ most humiliating way to describe one of Earth’s most terrifyingly effective predators. >> >> Picture of her from the USA Today > > Ohhhhh she is one of nature’s most successful predators known for taking down animals EASILY ten times her size and could take me out like a Taco Bell burrito and all I wanna do is smootch her lil bitty faaaaace jjuigfhdtgdgvtuhfhftbyjghfdyk

theothin: > lachlanthesane: > >> dimestoretajic: >> >>> terraswallows: >>> >>>> For all the MTG fans, if you know, then you know. >>> >>> … OH >> >> I will give the short version of this explanation, other people can come up with a fuller version if they like. >> >> 1. It’s the finals of a high-stakes Magic the Gathering tournament. Player A has won Round 1 by using the card in the meme, “Borborygmos Enraged”. Specifically, they used the last line of the card, “Discard a land card: Borborygmos Enraged deals 3 damage to target creature or player”, by discarding a whole bunch of land cards and dealing a whole bunch of damage to Player B. >> 2. After the first round of a Magic tournament game, each player has the opportunity to swap cards between their main deck and their side deck. Most players use their main deck for a general-purpose game, and then fill their side deck with things that specifically counteract whatever their opponent is doing. >> 3. At this particular tournament, Player B had a card in their side deck called “Pithing Needle”. To simplify the text of Pithing Needle, it basically says “When you play Pithing Needle, name any card. Abilities of the named card can’t be activated.” Player B swaps several copies of Pithing Needle into their main deck. >> 4. In Round 2 of the tournament, Player B plays Pithing Needle early in the game, and names “Borborygmos”. What he _wants_ to happen is that, if Player A plays Borborygmos Enraged, the Pithing Needle will prevent Player A from activating the ability to discard a whole bunch of land cards and deal a whole bunch of damage to Player B. >> 5. Player A, being a sneaky bastard, notices that Player B didn’t say “Borborygmos Enraged” when he played Pithing Needle. He said “Borborygmos”. Player A also remembers that “Borborygmos Enraged” (originally released in 2013) is the second card that features the character Borborygmos, and that there was a card released in 2006 that was simply called “Borborygmos”. >> 6. Player A therefore goes ahead with his game plan completely unaffected by the Pithing Needle. He plays Borborygmos Enraged, discards a bunch of land cards, and deals a whole bunch of damage to Player B. >> 7. Player B, of course, objects to this, saying that the Pithing Needle prevents the damage. Player A points out that the Pithing Needle is not preventing him from activating the abilities of “Borborygmos Enraged” from 2013, it is preventing him from activating the abilities of “Borborygmos” from 2006. >> 8. Both players are fully aware that Player B was _talking about_ “Borborygmos Enraged” when he played the Pithing Needle, but because Player B never said the word “Enraged”, the tournament judge rules in Player A’s favour. The Pithing Needle is ignored, the damage from Borborygmos Enraged goes through, and Player A wins the tournament. >> 9. Everyone hates this and Wizards of the Coast implement an official “close enough is good enough” policy for any “name a card” card in tournaments. >> > > to expand on the last point they did already have a “close enough” policy which is why it _would_ have worked if this was the only borborygmos card. the change was to broaden what counts as “close enough” > > under the old rules, this _was_ all totally legit. tournament players are under no obligation to keep their opponents from messing up!

sajdd: > bye

redstonedust: > i know the idea of ‘hear me out’ type posts is weird non-conventional attraction but i also have a fascination for the people whos 'hear me outs’ are conventionally attractive characters from the most OBSURE media. like if you were asked to name a sexy character and your first thought is the girl from a mostly forgotten 1980s canadian animated scifi musical im gonna be way more intrigued by whats going on in your brain than if you had said like. the dragon from shrek yknow.

chongoblog: > World’s biggest Sonic fan insists upon calling Mario “The Olympics Guy”

ninamodaffari: > wait kids need ai to make their favorite characters talk??? they can’t just do that in their heads normal style?? what happened to making your favorite characters kiss by making little videos in your head and projecting it into your psyche cinema style before bedtime

i-point-out-iambic-pentameter: > miiilowo: > >> I hate when a tiny stupid thing pushes you over the edge and makes you freak the fuck out because it makes you look like a completely irrational tar pit of a human being. Like no I promise this is warranted just maybe not about that specifically I swear I’m well adjusted. Come closer stick your fingers in my cage > >> Come closer stick your fingers in my cage > > is iambic pentameter!