agent-superwholockian:

helloarmchairphilosopher:

thathottransguy-alex:

tyr-the-shining:

diaryofakanemem:

Lemme bless y’all with this video

ok but how is he doing that

he’s wearing false rubber thumbs with a touch-based LED in them! when he puts his index finger to his thumb, it turns the light on.

I just realized the doc is wearing a kippah…

He’s an orthodox jewish wizard dentist and his Instagram is full of tricks like this one that he does for his young patients to help them feel calm!

gem-under-the-mountain:

aviewfrommercury:

bene-geserit:

galesofnovember:

wild-guy:

“In a performance protest against the Australian shark cull and the global slaughter of sharks, a woman risks it all to dance on the sea floor with swarms of tiger sharks up to 17 feet long without any dive or protective gear.” (x)

The woman in the video is Hannah Fraser, and yes, it’s real.  Hannah Fraser is a professional mermaid/free-diver who does shit like this all the time

YOOOOOOO.

I’m not saying I have a mad-crush on this amazing shark-mermaid-lady, but I have a mad-crush on this amazing shark-mermaid-lady.

This is great but she’s not “risking it all”. The entire fucking point is that she’s not risking it all. Those sharks are HARMLESS and dont care about humans at all. As you can see, they’re totally chill with her being there. And as a pro-diver/mermaid she’s fully trained to free dive without equipment.

The reason this is such an effective protest is because it proves that tiger sharks aren’t interested in harming humans. And that they’re actually quite gentle even. So please, for Hannah Fraser, stop putting this shark-scare bullshit on images of her when that’s literally what she’s fighting with this performance.

closet-keys:

closet-keys:

that’s one thing we discussed in my social informatics course that I wish was discussed more outside of like.. graduate level information science courses– 

Companies that run online forums literally decide how much and what kind of racism/homophobia/misogyny/transphobia/ableism they will allow. They make the decision usually based on economics– if it generates content through controversy, they’ll probably allow it through. If it makes people boycott the company or brings severely bad press to a mainstream audience, they’ll probably take it down. 

Commercial content moderators are hired to remove objectionable content, and that is dependent on two things: 

  1. Users reporting content to draw attention to it
  2. Company policy about what counts as objectionable

The internet isn’t “just like this.” It’s this level of racist because this level of racism is profitable for the company. It might shift with changing social norms, but it’s an unsympathetic economic line being drawn, not one based in consideration of harm towards users. 

Two relevant readings from the course which I encourage those interested to read: 

Nakamura, L. (2015). The unwanted labour of social
media: Women of colour call out culture as venture
community management. New Formations (86), 106.

Roberts, S.T. (2016). Commercial content moderation:
Digital laborers’ dirty work. In Noble, S.U. and Tynes, B.
(Eds.), The intersectional internet: Race, sex, class and
culture online (pp. 147-159). New York: Peter Lang.

1dietcokeinacan:

I hate when u say “deja vu” out loud n someone ur with goes “what was it?” Like bitch we all can barely communicate the most straightforward ideas without utter confusion and chaos…..u rly believe it is within my capacity to explain exactly what fleeting moment of temporal embodiment made me feel like a vague reincarnated ghost girl trapped in a child’s dream??? Surely u are mistaken.