EserciziDiCaos

bundibird:

what generation do you fall into?

silent gen (1928-1945)

baby boomer (1946-1964)

gen x (1965-1980)

gen y/millennial (1981-1996)

gen z/iGen (1997-2010)

gen alpha (2010-2024)

See Results

(This post is brought to you by the fact that tumblr are, hilariously, claiming that 50% of current users are gen z, and i wanna see how accurate claim that is.)

Edit: so far it looks like there are way less Gen X than I thought there were on here, and way more Gen Z. Huh. How about that. Colour me surprised.

(via atrusofmyst)

E un'altra play l'abbiamo fatta.

La prima a Bologna. Potevamo non portargli la Secchia per ricordare che ce la teniamo comunque noi?

Al netto del campanilismo scherzoso, abbiamo avuto un sacco di curiosi, feedback entusiasti da chi l'ha provato e un invito al Torino Comics di Dicembre, per cui e’ stato un successone.

Ora non ci resta che mettere in piedi davvero la casa editrice. Avanti cosi’.

kittydesade:

eldritchamy:

kanagenwrites:

eurodynamic:

I once wrote a 1500 word essay on something I’d forgotten to read in the 40 minutes before class. Including the time it took to read the thing I’d forgotten to read.

I got an A on that paper.

Writing is a skill. Skill is muscle. If you don’t use a muscle, it atrophies. If you are a student and you are tempted to use genAI to cheese an assignment, I am begging you for your own sake to not do it.

This is not a moral stance about genAI (which is shit at what it’s ostensibly for, and full of lies and evil, and fueled by art theft and burning rainforests, and there is no good reason to ever use it for anything; that’s the moral reason for why you shouldn’t use it), it is a purely pragmatic stance based on the fact that if you use it you will never learn the single most essential skill that is used in every single workplace.

You will never learn to bullshit.

And if you cannot bullshit, you will not understand when you are being fed bullshit by others.

For your own sake you must learn to do your own thinking, your own bullshitting, because our trashfire society runs on bullshit and for your own good you must become fluent in it, because very few people will bother to translate it for you. It was asinine in the late 90s, and it is asinine today, but it is the central truth of adult society: everything is bullshit, and you need to know what is going on beneath the bullshit, and you need to be able to bullshit back if necessary.

I know that the expectations being placed on you are ever-increasing, and I know that it does not seem rational to put effort into explaining the plot of a Charles Dickens novel to someone who has read the thing 50 times and will read 50 identical essays about it over the weekend. I know you are being handed ever-greater heaps of what is functionally mindless busywork because of an institutional obsession with metrics that don’t actually measure learning in a useful way. High school was nightmarish in the 90s and I am fully aware that it has only gotten worse.

Nevertheless, you must try, if only for your own sake. Curiosity is your best hope, and dogged determination your best weapon. Learn, please, if only out of spite.

I was able to get an A on that paper because I was able to skim the reading, figure out what it was about, and bullshit for 1500 words in the space of 40 minutes.

Imagine what you can do if you learn to bullshit like I can bullshit.

For my senior year of AP English, I was assigned reading over Easter break. We were instructed to read The Old Man And The Sea, and save the rest of the short stories in the book for the first week back.

Unfortunately, what I heard was “read everything BUT The Old Man And The Sea.”

Double unfortunately: the first day back was a test, on The Old Man And The Sea. Which I had read exactly zero words of. It was, notably, a short essay test. It wasn’t multiple choice or fill in the blank. It was designed to require deliberate answers from scratch, entirely out of your own head, with nothing to go on BUT what was in your head.

And in the course of about 45 minutes, I was able to use the questions of the test itself to piece together a vague enough sense of how the story went to bullshit my way through other questions. I gave wide, thematic answers that were extremely light on details, since I did not know any of them, and did not even know this test would be happening until it was in front of me. An essay test for an AP-level English class.

I had a starting point of zero information, and an essay test about the thing I was supposed to have read.

I bullshitted my way to a B+ on it.

On a test I should have gotten a ZERO on.

It’s been 16 years since I took that test.

I couldn’t tell you a damn thing about The Old Man And The Sea.

But you better fucking believe I still know how to bullshit, and when someone is trying to bullshit me.

The power and utility of knowing how bullshit works CANNOT be overstated. It is one of the most important skills you can ever have.

My favorite part of this is the little “Yet I’m still failing” at the bottom of the screencap. It’s not yet occurred to you to change something you’re doing? Maybe try not using ChatGPT?

(via atrusofmyst)

black—armor:

(via gianlucavisconti)

IDEA!

lobautumny:

caracalliope:

beholdingslut:

beholdingslut:

this from the guy who wrote the sting pain index, a scale he constructed after letting himself be stung by insects

“why did i start this list” pleaseeeeeee this is so funny

his descriptions were extremely on-point, and frankly inspiring when writing a hurt/comfort scene

Instagram poets could never!

For those who want it, here is the entire list:

Anyways, dude’s 1,000% a huge masochist. Nobody just describes pain like this unless they’re enjoying it.

Armadillo Wasp. Looks like a sleek mecha design of a wasp

(via exterminate-ak)

xradiorental:

screampotato:

yimra-deactivated20250209:

queersatanic:

ALT

ALT

ALT

ALT

Tweet

What the fuck

This is absolutely fascinating. I’ve now been looking at Alex Colville’s paintings and trying to work out what it is about them that makes them look like CGI and how/why he did that in a world where CGI didn’t exist yet. Here’s what I’ve got so far:

- Total lack of atmospheric perspective (things don’t fade into the distance)

- Very realistic shading but no or only very faint shadows cast by ambient light.

- Limited interaction between objects and environment (shadows, ripples etc)

- Flat textures and consistent lighting used for backgrounds that would usually show a lot of variation in lighting, colour and texture

- Bodies apparently modelled piece by piece rather than drawn from life, and in a very stiff way so that the bodies show the pose but don’t communicate the body language that would usually go with it. They look like dolls.

- Odd composition that cuts off parts that would usually be considered important (like the person’s head in the snowy driving scene)

- Very precise drawing of structures and perspective combined with all the simplistic elements I’ve already listed. In other words, details in the “wrong” places.

What’s fascinating about this is that in early or bad CGI, these things come from the fact that the machine is modelling very precisely the shapes and perspectives and colours, but missing out on some parts that are difficult to render (shadows, atmospheric perspective) and being completely unable to pose bodies in such a way as to convey emotion or body language.

But Colville wasn’t a computer, so he did these same things *on purpose*. For some reason he was *aiming* for that precise-but-all-wrong look. I mean, mission accomplished! The question in my mind is, did he do this because he was trying to make the pictures unsettling and alienating, or because in some way, this was how he actually saw the world?

omf i never thought i’d find posts about alex colville on tumblr, but! he’s a local artist where i’m from & i work at a library/archives and have processed a lot of documents related to his art. just wanted to give my two cents!

my impression is that colville did see the world as an unsettling place and a lot of his work was fueled by this general ~malaise?? but in a lot of cases, he was trying to express particular fears or traumas. for instance, this painting (horse and train) was apparently inspired by a really tragic experience his wife had:

iirc she was in a horrible automobile crash, as the car she was in collided with a train. i find it genuinely horrifying to look at, knowing the context, but a lot of colville’s work is like that? idk he just seems to capture the feeling you get in nightmares where everything is treacle-ish and slow and inevitable.

(via atrusofmyst)

alska:

And i did

(via mafaldinablabla)

americanphysco:

because the thing is bisexual

Ma seriamente?

(via bidonica)