Shared posts

27 Feb 05:00

Dress Color

This white-balance illusion hit so hard because it felt like someone had been playing through the Monty Hall scenario and opened their chosen door, only to find there was unexpectedly disagreement over whether the thing they'd revealed was a goat or a car.
26 Feb 13:01

Prices written smaller seem more affordable.Unfortunately, there...



Prices written smaller seem more affordable.

Unfortunately, there are studies to show that this is generally true. What with decoy prices, anchoring, the age-old susceptibility to 99s and a host of other biases, we’re at the mercy of many factors when it comes to trying to make vaguely rational pricing decisions.

For plenty more see William Poundstone’s, Priceless: The Myth of Fair Value (and how to Take Advantage of It), Scribe, 2010.

Hat tip: Avraham Byers once again.

25 Feb 05:00

Stories of the Past and Future

Little-known fact: The 'Dawn of Man' opening sequence in 2001 cuts away seconds before the Flinstones theme becomes recognizable.
24 Feb 08:00

demassify: Dictionary.com Word of the Day

demassify: to break something into elements that appeal to individual tastes or special interests.
23 Feb 22:41

Hark, A Vagrant: Katherine Sui Fun Cheung




buy this print!

I read this quote, from an interview with Katherine Sui Fun Cheung, and the interviewer asked about why she was a pilot and all that, and she just said "I wanted to fly, so I did." And I thought MAN! I can't even figure out what to eat for breakfast, never mind sailing through a load of barriers just because I think I want to give something a shot. "Flying? Whatever, I'll just Do It."

Another quote? "What's the point of flying a plane if you can't have fun doing it?" I love her!

Look at her! We all want to be her.

I love early aviatrices - Bessie Coleman, Amelia Earhart, Beryl Markham, etc - they were like "oh is there a brand new job on the face of the earth? Think I'll invite myself to do it before anyone says I can't."

Not too much time goes by before Top Gun washes up once again on these shores.
20 Feb 15:16

saltycornchip:best-of-memes:Someone took a candid photo of a...

by joberholtzer


saltycornchip:

best-of-memes:

Someone took a candid photo of a fight in Ukranian Parliament that is as well-composed as the best renaissance art

this is currently my favorite thing on the entire internet

19 Feb 13:01

The decoy price.The technique of adding a significantly more...



The decoy price.

The technique of adding a significantly more expensive option in order to instantly make the other options look reasonable by comparison. These kinds of manipulations have been shown to be scarily effective.

For example:

Pricing decoys are another way retailers get you to part with more money than you planned on. In his book Predictably Irrational, behavioural economist and professor Dan Ariely demonstrates how a large magazine successfully employed a strategy called the “decoy effect” to increase revenue from subscription sales. Prospective subscribers were given three choices:

1.       Web-only subscription for $59
2.       Print-only subscription for $125
3.       Web + print subscription for $125

At first glance, the middle price point appears to be superfluous. Why would anyone buy a print-only subscription for $125 if they could get a web and print for the same price? Ariely tested the price points with MIT students and found that 16% of students chose option 1 and 84% chose option 3; not surprisingly, none chose option 2.

Then Ariely did something really interesting; on the assumption that having a decoy price (option 2) was influencing people’s choices, he removed the decoy and retested the price points. This time, the subscription choices were as follows:

1.       Web-only subscription for $59
2.       Web + print subscription for $125

With the decoy removed, the option that had previously been the most popular – the more expensive print + online access subscription – suddenly became the least popular choice. Only 32% of those surveyed chose the more expensive option, with 68% selecting the online-only subscription. Clearly the middle price point wasn’t superfluous; it was smart marketing that made option 3 look more attractive to subscribers.

Avraham Byers, Here’s why you should always pay full retail price, Financial Post,  April 22nd 2014

19 Feb 19:49

Passing the tests of patience.

by Jessica Hagy

card4538

Share and Enjoy:DiggStumbleUpondel.icio.usFacebookTwitterGoogle Bookmarks

16 Feb 14:41

mapsontheweb: Evolution of the delta of the Po river, Italy,...

by joberholtzer


mapsontheweb:

Evolution of the delta of the Po river, Italy, 1604-1985.

12 Feb 00:00

Black Hole Moon

by xkcd

Black Hole Moon

What would happen if the Moon were replaced with an equivalently-massed black hole? If it's possible, what would a lunar ("holar"?) eclipse look like?

—Matt

"Not much" and "not much."

A black hole the mass of the Moon would have an event horizon about the size of a sand grain. Specifically, according to one of my favorite charts, a black hole moon would be a grain of fine to medium-fine sand, and could pass through a sieve of size ASTM No. 70 or larger. I mean, I guess a black hole with the mass of the Moon would pass right through any sieve, destroying it in the process, but that's neither here nor there.[1]The expression "that's neither here nor there" can be kind of confusing and ambiguous, but I guess that's neither here nor there.

Since the Moon's mass and position wouldn't change, the tides on Earth wouldn't change, either. When you're floating outside a spherical mass, its pull on you is the same regardless of whether the mass is concentrated at the center of the sphere or spread out throughout it. If the Sun were replaced by a black hole of the same mass, the Earth's orbit wouldn't change, although life on Earth might.

With the Moon gathered into a point, there'd be no moonlight, which would affect the life cycles of all kinds of nocturnal animals. But compared to a lot of the other things we've done, that would be fairly minor. The Earth's orbit is stabilized by the Moon, but the lunar-mass black hole would probably serve the same role.

This black hole Moon would be pretty low-profile. If it were much smaller, it would evaporate through Hawking radiation, but a black hole the size of the Moon actually absorbs more energy from the cosmic background radiation than it emits through the Hawking mechanism. Our black hole would really be black.

At least, if it didn't eat anything. If the black hole devoured any objects, it would let off a tremendous blast of radiation. Black holes burn brightly as they devour things; the whirlpool of matter heats up as it falls inward, causing it to glow brightly.[2]A black hole can't devour matter too fast, though, because at some point it would be producing so much radiation that it would blast its own "food" away. This is called the Eddington limit.
If our black hole were devouring matter at the Eddington limit, it would be hot enough to sterilize the Earth.

Fortunately, there's not a lot out there for it to eat, so it wouldn't glow very brightly for now. It would spend most of its time drastically altering the orbits of nearby dust particles—one sand grain pushing other sand grains around.[3]Even if it sucked in matter at the rate the Earth—with its much larger "collecting area"—sucks in interplanetary dust, it wouldn't necessarily be a problem for us.

But there would be one interesting effect: In addition to getting darker, Earth would get colder, because moonlight warms the Earth. It's a very tiny contributor to our global energy balance; the Moon is five or six orders of magnitude dimmer than the Sun. But it's there.

Measurements show that global temperature varies with a 28-day cycle; all else being equal, the Earth is hottest during the full moon. It's a tiny difference—small fractions of a degree—but it's there.

But it turns out most of this effect is not due to moonlight. The largest contributor is the fact that the Earth is slightly closer to the Sun during a full Moon:

Calculating the amount of energy radiated back to Earth by the Moon is deceptively tricky. The Moon reflects sunlight, but with some surprising twists. When the Moon is half-illuminated, you might think it would be half as bright as when full—but it's much less bright than that. And once you account for that, there are even trickier effects to deal with, because science is the worst.[4]Like the fact that the waxing Moon is 20% brighter than the waning Moon, or that the Moon is a mild retroreflector. Then, on top of all the weird visible-light effects, the Moon also heats up under the Sun, then radiates that heat as infrared light.

There's a great discussion of the Moon's effect on the Earth's energy budget in this article by Robert Knox. The upshot is that the Moon's infrared heat radiation turns out to affect Earth's temperature about 10 times more than the visible moonlight, but still about 10 times less than the effect from gravity moving Earth closer and farther from the Sun. Knox even quantifies the effect this has on Earth's radiation balance—the presence of infrared moonlight warms the planet by 1.2 milli-degrees Fahrenheit (m°F).

Without moonlight, the planet would cool down slightly. But given the accelerating rate at which we're adding CO2 to the atmosphere—which changes the Earth's energy balance—we'd make up the difference in a couple of weeks.

So all in all, the conversion of the Moon to a black hole might not even be that big of a deal.

Unless, of course, it happened on certain days between 1969 and 1972, in which case Nixon would've needed yet another one of those speeches.

12 Feb 21:05

Photo



05 Feb 00:00

Zippo Phone

by xkcd

Zippo Phone

What in my pocket actually contains more energy, my Zippo or my smartphone? What would be the best way of getting the energy from one to the other? And since I am already feeling like Bilbo in this one, is there anything else in my pocket that would have unexpected amounts of stored energy?

—Ian Cummings

The Zippo lighter easily beats the phone, even though its fuel tank is barely half the size of a large phone's battery, because hydrocarbons are fantastic at storing energy. Gasoline, butane, alcohol, and fat contain a lot of chemical energy, which is why our bodies run on them.[1]I mean, the latter two, at least. You can't eat gasoline.​[2]As far as I know.​[3]Although technically swallowing gasoline may not kill you, according to Utah Poison Control specialist Brad Dahl. However, he cautions that you will find yourself "burping gasoline," which is "not real tasty." (Actual quote.)​[4]Also, if you don't rinse your throat afterward, it will give you chemical burns.

How much energy do they contain? Well, let's put it this way: A fully-charged car battery holds barely as much energy as a sandwich.

A container of butane the size of a phone battery could, in principle, power the phone about 13 times longer than the battery itself could.[5]In the case of my phone, that could give me as much as three hours. The obvious question, then, is "why doesn't my phone run on propane?"

The obvious answer is "because your phone would catch fire," but that's not quite it. See, lithium-ion batteries are also extremely flammable, and a huge amount of effort has gone into making Michael Bay scenarios less common.

The truth is more complicated. People have wanted to build various kinds of "fuel cell" batteries for almost as long as we've had portable electronics. The allure of hydrocarbon energy storage continues to this day—if you do a Google search for fuel cell phone charger, you'll find news stories about new products announced every year. Many of them are no longer available.

If you really want to power your phone with butane, the current hot project—as far as I can tell from a cursory search—seems to be the kraftwerk portable USB generator, which has made over a million dollars on Kickstarter with several weeks left in its campaign. Of course, a portable battery of the same size could do a lot of the same things, but there are certainly some use cases where the butane charger offers advantages. If you place a premium on reducing weight, or have to go a long time without contact with the power grid, it could be a good option. Let's put it this way: If the phrase "power your phone on butane", makes you think, "hey, that would solve a problem I have!" then go for it.

This gives us the answer to Ian's second question. The Zippo lighter has more energy, but getting it into the phone is a little difficult and requires the overhead of a fuel cell or generator. Getting the phone to start a fire, on the other hand, is quite reasonable, although it may require doing bad things to the battery.

Ian's third question was "what else in my pocket might contain more energy?" Like Gollum, I have no idea what's in your pocket,[6]Or whether you're happy to see me, for that matter. but I can guess that it might contain one thing with more energy than a battery: Your hand.

An adult man's hand weighs about a pound.[7]I wanted to put "citation needed" after that, but to my mild dismay I actually do have a citation. The hand isn't the fattiest part of the body, but if burned completely, it would probably give off about 500 watt-hours of energy, give or take. That's 50 times the energy content of the phone battery, and almost 10 times that of the Zippo. It's also about as much as a car battery.

And, for that matter, about as much as a sandwich.

30 Jan 05:00

Super Bowl

My hobby: Pretending to miss the sarcasm when people show off their lack of interest in football by talking about 'sportsball' and acting excited to find someone else who's interested, then acting confused when they try to clarify.
15 Jan 08:24

Currently 'avoiding' sleep by finishing a short story for class tomorrow. Do you suffer from problems with procrastination and/or creative blocks?

by joberholtzer

Yes! Absolutely. Procrastination is always hard; I don’t have any good silver bullets there. I’m resigned that a good deal of my life will be spent finding new strategies to combat procrastination, and using them until their effectiveness wears off. Overall, most strategies involve trying to get excited for the work but not daunted by its scale or obsessive about perfection. Whatever you’re working on isn’t going to be the lasting totem for you, the person. It doesn’t even have to be that good. It just has to be closer to done than when you started thinking about it.

As for creative blocks, Zach Weiner blew my mind a few years ago when he told me he doesn’t believe in them, just treats them as a lack of input to be addressed. Don’t know what you want to get out? Put more stuff in. Anything. Just give your brain more stuff to process and work on and that machinery kicking in will pay off. Keep your brain interested in the world and fed with stuff and it will do good work for you and rarely dry up. Don’t resign yourself to boredom. Zach reads about a book a day. He’s a monster. It’s incredibly frustrating. Obscene, really. Let’s all think about how we can’t be Zach and shake our fists.

09 Jan 13:00

What I Do as a Librarian

by Dover Public Library
Recently I came across an article from lifehacker.com titled, What I Do as a Librarian, and naturally I decided to take a look. It’s by Andy Orin, and features an interview with the Associate Director of the Baldwin Public Library in Michigan, Kathryn Bergeron. If you’ve ever been interested in what a librarian actually does […]
08 Jan 11:47

nous

by Author

nous

A placeholder, until the next strip.

UPDATE: For those requesting a t-shirt, here is a hi-res version of the image so you can print your own.

UPDATE2: A kind reader called Dan has made a better hi-res image for you to use if you prefer:

Why not become a Patron of the Blasphemous Arts? Book shop here

06 Jan 04:53

Holidays & Days of Note for January 6, 2014 *   Twelfth...



Holidays & Days of Note for January 6, 2014

*   Twelfth Day, now you know when that damn song is over!

*   Epiphany, This day was also at one time known as Old Christmas (Julian calendar).

*   La Bafana (Italy) a festival on which the night before Bafana, a kindly witch flies down chimneys on her broom and bestows gifts on good children and leaving lumps of coal for the bad children. / la Fiesta de los Reyes Magos `Three Kings Day (Latin America) day when, among other things, the kids get presents rather than Christmas.

*   Festival of Kore (Ancient Greek) 

*   Zvaigznes Diena (Ancient Latvia) 

*   Day of the Lord of Misrule 

*   Little Christmas, Women´s Christmas or Nollaig na mBan (Irish) 

*   Birthday of Haile Selassie (Rastafari movement) 

*   The Birthday of Sherlock Holmes 

05 Jan 07:52

Bookplate: Davies Gilbert formerly Giddy

by Stephen J F Plowman

The bookplate of Davies Gilbert PRS (1766-1839), formerly Giddy, is on sale at eBay, the vendor is bungalowblondie2.  Davies Giddy was the only son of Rev’d Edward Giddy and Catherine Davies. Catherine was heiress to her father and was one of the co-heirs to the Barony of Sandys of the Vine which fell into abeyance in 1683 after the death of the 8th Baron.

Gilbert-Gazette

In 1808 Davies Giddy married Mary Anne Gilbert.     Following the death of Mary’s uncle, Davies Giddy took the Name and Arms of Gilbert.

Gilbert-Davies Bookplate2

Arms: Quarterly 1st Argent on a chevron Gules three roses of the field with a canton Gules for difference (for Gilbert)
2nd Or a fess engrailed Vert in chief a lion passant Gules in base three torteaux two and one (for Giddy)
3rd Argent a fess ermines between three pierced mullets Gules (for Davies)
4th Argent three bendlets Sable on a canton of the last a cross of the first (for Noye)
5th Or a fess indented between three crosses crosslet fitchy Gules (for Sandys of Ombersley)
6th Argent a cross raguly Sable (for Sandys of the Vine )

With an escutcheon of pretence
Argent on a chevron Gules three roses of the field (for Gilbert)

Crest:A squirrel sejant Gules cracking a nut Or charged on the shoulder with a cross crosslet gold for difference

Motto: Teg yw Hedwch

Their children bore the Arms without the canton Gules for difference.

 

 


01 Jan 00:00

Fairy Demographics

by xkcd

Fairy Demographics

How many fairies would fly around, if each fairy is born from the first laugh of a child and fairies were immortal?

—Mira Kühn, Germany

"There are always a lot of young ones," explained Wendy, who was now quite an authority, "because you see when a new baby laughs for the first time a new fairy is born, and as there are always new babies there are always new fairies. They live in nests on the tops of trees; and the mauve ones are boys and the white ones are girls, and the blue ones are just little sillies who are not sure what they are."
           —Peter Pan

Interestingly, fairies in the Peter Pan mythology definitely don't live forever. At the end of the book, Peter comes to visit Wendy a year after their adventures. Wendy asks about Tinker Bell, and Peter says he can't remember her and assumes she's died, and Wendy observes that fairies don't live very long.[1]When she expressed a doubtful hope that Tinker Bell would be glad to see her he said, "Who is Tinker Bell?"

"O Peter," she said, shocked; but even when she explained he could not remember.

"There are such a lot of them," he said. "I expect she is no more."

I expect he was right, for fairies don't live long, but they are so little that a short time seems a good while to them.
This suggests that at any given time, there are probably be far fewer fairies than humans in the Peter Pan universe, since they have the same birth rate and shorter lifespans.

But Mira's scenario assumes immortal fairies, so let's talk about immortal fairy demographics.

A fairy is created by every[2]Approximately, anyway, but we'll round up by assuming that all babies laugh. newborn baby. The total number of humans who have ever lived is somewhere around 100-120 billion,[3]There are various groups who have estimated this, and they all tend to come up with a number around in this range. If you take a set of estimates for ancient human population (Wikipedia has a table of them) and assume a birth rate near the biological maximum before the 20th century (35 to 45 births per 1,000, according to this paper), you can derive a similar number yourself. meaning 100-120 billion fairies have been created.

How much do all those fairies weigh? Tinker Bell, the main fairy from the Peter Pan universe, seems to be a little under six inches tall. In a scene in Hook, Tinker Bell (played by the 5 foot 9 inch Julia Roberts) fits comfortably in a 1/12 scale dollhouse, suggesting a height of 5.75 inches. As another data point, the statue of Tinker Bell at Madam Tussaud's wax museum is 5.5 inches. This suggests that fairies in Peter Pan are pretty close to 1/12th scale.

If fairies are 1/12th the size of humans, then they weigh \( \left( \tfrac{1}{12\text{th}}\right) ^3=\tfrac{1}{1728\text{th}} \) as much as us, which means Julia Roberts's Tinker Bell is probably around 35 grams.[4](two mice) As of 2015, total fairy biomass would be about 4 million tons. That's less than humans or horses, and probably comparable to the total mass of all humpback whales.[5]Fairies also probably outweigh wild birds.

At these numbers, fairies would be a minor piece of the ecosystem, although possibly a pretty annoying one.

But it wasn't always the case. In the early days of our species, our high birth rates (and death rates) plus our low population mean that we would have accumulated fairies quickly. The exact numbers depend on when the modern human (fairy-generating) species developed, but by the time the last ice age was over, the accumulated fairies could have outweighed our tiny living human population 10 to 1.

Once our population started growing following the agricultural revolution, we would have quickly outstripped fairies in terms of weight. In 2015, fairy biomass would be down to about 1.2% of human biomass, and by the mid-21st-century, they'd bottom out at less than 1%.

But as long as humans keep reproducing, the fairy population would keep growing. If we assume the human population will level off at around 9 billion partway through this century, then the share of mass occupied by fairies would continue rising steadily.

If our population stays at a stable 9 billion indefinitely, by 2100, they'll be back above 1% of human biomass, and they'll reach 2% by the year 3000. In the year 100,000, if our species is somehow still around, they'll outweigh us.

This makes things interesting. Let's assume fairies need to eat. If fairies weigh about as much as us, they'd presumably be consuming a similar share of food and water. So even if the Earth can support 400 million tons of human, it may not be able to support 400 million tons of human and another 400 million tons of fairy. This suggests that, sometime in the next hundred millennia, the growing fairy population would start to crowd out the human population.

But if fairies crowd out humans, that would in turn reduce the growth rate of the fairies, slowing down the replacement process. The end result (in this idealized model) would be that the fairy population growth would taper off as the human population declined. The situation would never quite reach a stable equilibrium, because every 1,728 human births would create one human's weight in fairies, reducing the Earth's total human carrying capacity by 1. But since the rate of fairy creation would slow down as the human population shrank, the process would stretch out for a very long time.

This odd situation would only exist because fairies—in Mira's scenario—are immortal. The scenario would change dramatically if we introduced a fairy death rate. Perhaps fairies don't age or experience natural deaths, but can still die from other causes.

What would kill the fairies? Who knows.[6]J. M. Barrie introduces a fairy-killing mechanism in Peter Pan; any time anyone says "I don't believe in fairies", a random fairy dies. In a world of immortal fairies, this could serve as an effective feedback. If no one has heard of fairies, no one will say they don't believe in them, and their population will grow. As fairies start to be common enough to be noticed, people will have a reason to say they don't believe in them, and their population will drop.

Eventually, civilization would start documenting the existence of fairies, and then no one would have any reason to disbelieve their existence, and the feedback loop would break down. But ecosystems aren't static. If you mess with one part, the other parts change in response. Fairies could become the dominant species, but the system they learned to dominate wouldn't be there forever.

If fairies represent most of the biomass in the ecosystem, eventually, given enough time ...

... something will learn to eat them.

25 Dec 08:00

Christmastide: Dictionary.com Word of the Day

Christmastide: the festival season from Christmas to after New Year's Day.
18 Dec 13:30

vizualize: Spirograph-like tool online

by joberholtzer
17 Dec 12:51

Holidays & Days of Note for December 17, 2014. *   First...



Holidays & Days of Note for December 17, 2014.

*   First Day of Hanukkah (Jewish) 

*   International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers (U. S.)

*   Wright Brothers Day, (U.S.) a federal observance by Presidential proclamation

*   Saturnalia (Ancient Rome) Seven day celebration dedicated to Saturn in ancient Rome. It was marked by tomfoolery, mayhem, merriment and the reversal of social roles, in which slaves and masters ostensibly switched places. It’s where many of the things we call Christmasy come from. Which is a little odd as Saturn was not the most chipper of Gods.

13 Dec 10:00

The Lake Wobegon Effect. Where “all the children are above...



The Lake Wobegon Effect.

Where “all the children are above average.” From the intro by Garrison Keillor to the News from Lake Wobegon on the radio show A Prairie Home Companion. Also known as illusory superiority. From the popular studies where, for example, 80% of people think they are above average drivers, when asked to estimate the % of chores done in the household it adds up to more than 100%, and we overestimate our input to project work and it’s impact on its success. For the best treatment I’ve read, and references, see Thinking Fast and Slow by Dan Kahneman.

14 Dec 08:00

Weltanschauung: Dictionary.com Word of the Day

Weltanschauung: a comprehensive conception or image of the universe and of humanity's relation to it.
08 Dec 05:00

Feedback

A new study finds that if you give rats a cell phone and a lever they can push to improve the signal, the rats will chew on the cell phone until it breaks and your research supervisors will start to ask some questions about your grant money.
24 Nov 22:17

If Nobody Ever Asks For Your Ideas You May Not Realize Some Ideas Are Better Than Others

by Zak S
Sometimes you read people on-line--you read their game blog or in a forum or whatever--and you think: this is the first time anyone has ever listened to you about anything, isn't it? Some handle it with grace, and it's cool to see. Some don't--but they don't in a very specific way.

_

If people often seriously ask you for your opinion and then go do something with your opinion that affects something, then you might start to think of opinions as affecting things.

If nobody ever seriously asks for your opinion, then you might not think of your opinion as carrying much weight or affecting anything.

-

If you think of your opinion as affecting things, you might be incentivized start to try to make sure it makes sense.

If you don't think of it as carrying much weight or affecting anything, you might not be incentivized to think too hard about trying to make sure it makes sense.

("Makes sense"--that is: matches what you know or could find out.)

-

If you try to make sure your opinion makes sense, you might think of opinions in general as things people have thought out and really believe.

If you don't think too hard about whether your opinion makes sense, you probably think of opinions in general as inherently provisional things that you usually keep to yourself because they're not thought out.

(Like: if you don't think too hard about your opinions or value them much, your opinion of who is smarter might be, in your mind, about as meaningful as who is wearing a better shirt. The idea that one might be a thing you could go figure out and check on and the other isn't might never occur to you, if nobody much ever did anything based on your opinions anyway.)

_

If you think of opinions in general as things people have thought out, you'll tend to think of sharing opinions as basically just polite.

If you think of opinions inherently as provisional things people usually keep to themselves because they're not thought out, you probably think of sharing one as a bold, confident act.

_

If you're used to thinking of opinions as things people have thought out, someone sharing an opinion is (baseline) helpful, good, productive, polite, respectful, necessary and…inherently to be challenged by other opinions. And all subject to fact and being thought out.


If you think of sharing your opinion as a bold, confident act then someone saying what they're thinking is risky to everyone involved--it is asking for things to be put at risk, it is asking for people to make themselves vulnerable. After all--everyone risks revealing their opinion is not thought out, don't they?

_

You see people who seem shocked and alarmed not just to have their opinion contested (which is strangely common) but to be asked at all. This is frequently followed by a diatribe about how unimportant they are--as if that were the point. 

If people often seriously ask you for your opinion you won't see that request as hostile and won't see why people do.

If nobody ever seriously asks your opinion you may be scared. It's not just that you can't handle a conversation about your ideas, it's that you misunderstand why you're being asked to have one.


-
-
-
27 Nov 06:54

stuffbhappenin: Holidays and Days of Note for November 27,...







stuffbhappenin:

Holidays and Days of Note for November 27, 2014

*   Thanksgiving (U.S.) The point being that the real reason for Thanksgiving was not a harvest festival founded by the pilgrims, but a way of bringing the United States back together, North, South, rich, poor, and different cultures after a great riff that almost destroyed the country.

The idea is that as everyone celebrates it, everyone is brought together.

However if, as we have now, it is becoming the poor working on this day, so the dwindling middle-class can go out in a wild buying frenzy, so the top of top of the monetary food chain can become wealthier still then we are not just forgetting the meaning of Thanksgiving we’re saying the true original meaning as intended by Abraham Lincoln can go to hell.

*   Pins and Needles Day (U.S) The origin of this day goes back to the labor movement in the 1930s. The pro-labor Broadway musical Pins and Needles, opened on this day in 1937, at the Labor Stage Theater in New York City. This play was written by Harold Rome. It was produced by the International Ladies Garment Workers’ Union. Union members made up the cast. It ran for 1108 performances, once holding the record for longevity. The idea of the day now is to support the labor movement with creative efforts.

*   Lancashire Day (England) Day to celebrate the English county of Lancashire. Because of reasons. 

27 Nov 03:19

Photo



25 Nov 14:10

Win a free book! Heck, win TWO free books!

Hey guys! There's a contest at the writing blog. It's stupidly easy to enter. Just take a picture of a Post-It with the words "GIMME BOOK!" on it, and link to it in the comments.

Hopefully this'll be fun. We all need a little extra joy today.
31 Oct 16:25

Michael Penna happy halloween from the flux machine!



Michael Penna

happy halloween from the flux machine!