Strawberry Pop-Tart Blow-Torches

{{Title link: http://www.pmichaud.com/toast/ }}

nonternary:

In 1994, Patrick R. Michaud and some accomplices (inspired by a Dave Barry column) turned a toaster and an “SPT” into a rudimentary blowtorch and documented it on the then-nascent Web.

This is now one of the oldest webpages still accessible.

“(see Fun With Grapes – A Case Study)”

“At this point, the researchers also realized that the heat could inadvertently melt the adhesive cellophane and cause the flaming SPTs to suddenly eject from the toaster. Unfortunately, this did not occur.”


Tags:

#food #anything that makes me laugh this much deserves a reblog

Splain it to Me

{{Title link: https://status451.com/2016/01/06/splain-it-to-me/ }}

theunitofcaring:

fierceawakening:

taymonbeal:

Wow. This is a truly excellent work of Rationalist Social Justice. Status 451 may have just redeemed itself in my eyes.

(Also, I had no idea just how deeply I’d internalized the “nerd model” of communication. Not even just with other people; my internal monologue consists largely of me Taymonsplaining things to myself. Including while reading this article.)

This makes a ton of sense to me. The whole concept that “privileged people” are not supposed to correct “marginalized people” makes me instinctively feel like people are trying to avoid intellectual discussion and trying to evade defending their perspective or ideas. Which bothers me in part because I don’t want to be taken less seriously BECAUSE I’m marginalized – I’m concerned I’ll be dismissed as a politikid if I talk about it at all.

Where to them it might be more like “we don’t have the advantage of a whole long field of study with far-reaching traditions, but that doesn’t make my perspective invalid. Please take seriously the idea that a different way of thinking about that might make sense.”

The opening section about New York listening is a great explanation of competing access needs. 

And, yeah, I feel like different communication norms is a part of what’s going on in peoples’ reactions to learning ‘don’t correct marginalized people’.  To people like me who feel infinitely more comfortable with the information model of communication, “don’t correct marginalized people” almost comes across as “exclude marginalized people: cut them off from the flow of ideas and corrections and debates and redefinitions”. When a conversation is almost entirely about corrections and counter-corrections and reframings, “don’t argue with people” means “don’t take their ideas seriously”. 

Just like if you told the New Yorker “don’t interrupt me while talking”, they might think you mean “don’t behave in a way distinguishable from a flowerpot” and decide you don’t actually care about them as a listener. 

For people coming from a different communicative context, though, “don’t correct marginalized people” means “when people correct me, it’s almost always to assert the worthlessness of my ideas, not to engage with them. I don’t expect, when I’m corrected, that we’ve embarked on a back-and-forth of refining ideas; I expect that you’re corralling excuses to dismiss me. I can’t override this expectation (and it’s usually warranted, anyway) so if you want to actually hear my ideas communicated and fully realized, don’t offer your objections and disagreements and thought experiments. Doing that doesn’t include me, even if it is how you always communicate.”

…huh. I’m having a lot of trouble trying to map this article’s descriptions to my own life, because to me, the defining experience of navigating social-justice culture is constantly perceiving status games that nobody else would admit to seeing and that may not even have existed. (Seeing everything in terms of hierarchies and commands is what They do, after all. We are better than that. (Not that anyone would phrase it in quite that way, of course.)) I have had conversations that I perceived as an exchange of carefully veiled insults and insinuations that the other person should be outcast, and that I suspect (but am not certain) the other person perceived as friendly conversation about, say, the downsides of cleverness-based power fantasies. I have had so many conversations that I suspect the other person perceived as commiserating and that I perceived as them presenting their credentials and demanding to inspect mine.

I feel better around rationalists not because they lack hierarchical thinking but precisely because they acknowledge it. In general, they tend to recognise when things they say might be interpreted as orders and are careful to make it clear when things are not orders. And if it’s not clear, *it is permitted to ask for clarification on whether something was an order*. I use such extreme emphasis because it’s very, very important. Thinking in terms of “mandatory” and “permitted” and “forbidden” (rather than “right” and “okay” and “wrong”) isn’t itself forbidden here! I actually feel reasonably confident that you won’t jump all over me for writing this post! (Slightly less confident than I was before you reblogged this, but still enough that I’m willing to post it.) I don’t know whether you understand how huge a relief that is.


Tags:

#not only am I reasonably confident people from the rationalist-sphere won’t jump on me for writing this #I am even cautiously optimistic some of them might stand up for me if somebody *else* jumps on me #which in the end is the deciding factor in pressing ‘reblog’ rather than ‘close’ #reply via reblog #my issues with sj let me show you them #(the following category tag was added retroactively:) #our roads may be golden or broken or lost

Orgasmic design: how vibrators have become ambitious tech products

{{previous post in sequence}}


{{Title link: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/09/vibrator-design-tech-product-orgasm }}

ellaenchanting:

brin-bellway:

ellaenchanting:

sadydoyle:

This was a fun one! The concise history of vibrators; how they started as scary medical devices and shameful secrets, became a feminist statement, and are now a massively profitable industry that employs the same guys who used to design iPhones. 

I, for one, welcome our new tech overlords. Thank you, tech overlords, for helping me maintain my long distance relationship!

From a 1908 vibrator ad: “Bebout is ‘gentle, soothing, invigorating and refreshing. Invented by a woman who knows a woman’s needs. All nature pulsates and vibrates with life.’” It does indeed.

My reactions are torn between “ooh, knowledge! neat!” and “*fumes at normativity*”.

So, followers, here is some neat knowledge. Try to look past the bits like “women who used vibrators were actually more likely to take care of their sexual health by going to the gynecologist for regular exams”, as if there were no reasons other than “failure to take care of one’s sexual health” why one might avoid both vibrators and gynecologists.

(Hint: my GP told me that, as someone too young for disorders of age and too virginal for disorders of the sexually active (emphasis added), I should not have gynecological checkups because I wouldn’t get anything out of them.)

(Hint 2: some people just aren’t into genitals, sometimes including their own.)

You know, that part flew right by me without my even thinking twice about it. This is why privilege checks are important- when you are normative it’s hard to notice when you are being exclusionary or offensive, Thanks @brin-bellway!

You’re welcome!

Like I said in the tags, though, it’s impossible not to be exclusionary when talking about sexuality: people are just too diverse to be able to account for everyone. While I would definitely like people writing for small audiences that they know I’m in to be inclusive of me, I don’t seriously expect inclusivity of general-audience material (even if part of me is always disappointed when they fail to measure up). I do respect people who have considered these things, thrown up their hands at the impossibility of going much beyond the top few most common options, and knowingly sacrifice the visibility of people with very unusual sexualities to the altar of the greatest good for the greatest number: it’s not like I can come up with a better plan.

(Stuff that’s specifically about sex ed does need to be careful to acknowledge when it’s throwing up its hands, though. Some of the ““inclusive”” sex ed I got was worse-than-useless misinformation when applied to myself, and maybe if it had stated up front that it couldn’t cover everyone and “none of the above” was an option, I wouldn’t have had to learn that the hard way.)

(Whether “women* who are ineligible for gynecological checkups” is a common enough group to be worth accounting for is another matter. I reacted to this particular issue as an instance of the general case.)

*I’m not even getting into gender issues here, as I’m focusing on my own personal area of relevance.


Tags:

#reply via reblog #sexuality and lack thereof #nsfw?

Orgasmic design: how vibrators have become ambitious tech products

{{Title link: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/09/vibrator-design-tech-product-orgasm }}

ellaenchanting:

sadydoyle:

This was a fun one! The concise history of vibrators; how they started as scary medical devices and shameful secrets, became a feminist statement, and are now a massively profitable industry that employs the same guys who used to design iPhones. 

I, for one, welcome our new tech overlords. Thank you, tech overlords, for helping me maintain my long distance relationship!

From a 1908 vibrator ad: “Bebout is ‘gentle, soothing, invigorating and refreshing. Invented by a woman who knows a woman’s needs. All nature pulsates and vibrates with life.’” It does indeed.

My reactions are torn between “ooh, knowledge! neat!” and “*fumes at normativity*”.

So, followers, here is some neat knowledge. Try to look past the bits like “women who used vibrators were actually more likely to take care of their sexual health by going to the gynecologist for regular exams”, as if there were no reasons other than “failure to take care of one’s sexual health” why one might avoid both vibrators and gynecologists.

(Hint: my GP told me that, as someone too young for disorders of age and too virginal for disorders of the sexually active (emphasis added), I should not have gynecological checkups because I wouldn’t get anything out of them.)

(Hint 2: some people just aren’t into genitals, sometimes including their own.)


Tags:

#I am not *failing* to take care of my sexual health #I am *recognising* that my sexual health doesn’t look like that #sexuality and lack thereof #the more you know #don’t mind me #it’s pretty much impossible for me to read educational things about sexuality *without* fuming at normativity #one time I was listening to a podcast about How Sexuality Works #and the interviewee denied my existence three times in the first five minutes #I gave up in disgust #(I don’t remember now specifically which denials they used) #(just that I kept a running tally in my head and incremented it #each time they said something the implication of which was that my existence was impossible) #anyway neat knowledge #…it occurs to me that this post has a single-digit number of notes #and the OP is the person who wrote the article #which means she’s almost certainly going to see this #okay look true inclusivity is impossible #and even acknowledgement of one’s inevitable exclusivity is pretty difficult #I have very high standards and I don’t want you to feel too bad about failing to meet them #I just get bitter sometimes about navigating life with an extremely unusual sexuality


{{next post in sequence}}

New XKit Signed Release

{{Title link: https://github.com/new-xkit/XKit/releases/tag/firefox-v7.7.3 }}

new-xkit-extension:

Hey guys, we’ve been made aware through various channels that about two weeks ago Mozilla changed their policies on Extension Signing—something that we were never notified about, even given that we had reviews open at the time—and we were able to get our extension signed without re-writing it, contrary to what we had been told earlier by Mozilla volunteers.

Anyway, without further ado, we’re proud to present a version of New XKit that works with Firefox 43! Nothing else has changed, it’s literally exactly the same extension you have installed, but working. You’ll still have to download it directly from our github for now because Mozilla won’t show it on their store, but that’s a minor inconvenience in the long run, and we’re working on addressing it.

Anyway, let us know if you have any questions! And as always, if you got any trouble with XKit, you are welcome to join our support chat room. (hosted on gitter, if you want to join with a github account)


Tags:

#okay I guess I’m finally making the switch to New XKit #Tumblr: a User’s Guide

Almost No One is Evil; Almost Everything is Broken | 500 Million, But Not a Single One More

{{Title link: http://blog.jaibot.com/?p=413 }}

ilzolende:

jaiwithani:

We will never know their names.

The first victim could not have been recorded, for there was no written language to record it. They were someone’s daughter, or son, and someone’s friend, and they were loved by those around them. And they were in pain, covered in rashes, confused, scared, not knowing why this was happening to them or what they could do about it – victim of a mad, inhuman god. There was nothing to be done – humanity was not strong enough, not aware enough, not knowledgeable enough, to fight back against a monster that could not be seen.

It was in Ancient Egypt, where it attacked slave and pharaoh alike. In Rome, it effortlessly decimated armies. It killed in Syria. It killed in Moscow.  In India, five million dead. It killed a thousand Europeans every day in the 18th century. It killed more than fifty million Native Americans. From the Peloponnesian War to the Civil War, it slew more soldiers and civilians than any weapon, any soldier, any army (Not that this stopped the most foolish and empty souls from attempting to harness the demon as a weapon against their enemies).

Cultures grew and faltered, and it remained. Empires rose and fell, and it thrived. Ideologies waxed and waned, but it did not care. Kill. Maim. Spread. An ancient, mad god, hidden from view, that could not be fought, could not be confronted, could not even be comprehended. Not the only one of its kind, but the most devastating.

For a long time, there was no hope – only the bitter, hollow endurance of survivors.

In China, in the 10th century, humanity began to fight back.

It was observed that survivors of the mad god’s curse would never be touched again: they had taken a portion of that power into themselves, and were so protected from it. Not only that, but this power could be shared by consuming a remnant of the wounds. There was a price, for you could not take the god’s power without first defeating it – but a smaller battle, on humanity’s terms. By the 16th century, the technique spread, to India, across Asia, the Ottoman Empire and, in the 18th century, Europe. In 1796, a more powerful technique was discovered by Edward Jenner.

An idea began to take hold: Perhaps the ancient god could be killed.

A whisper became a voice; a voice became a call; a call became a battle cry, sweeping across villages, cities, nations. Humanity began to cooperate, spreading the protective power across the globe, dispatching masters of the craft to protect whole populations. People who had once been sworn enemies joined in common cause for this one battle. Governments mandated that all citizens protect themselves, for giving the ancient enemy a single life would put millions in danger.

And, inch by inch, humanity drove its enemy back. Fewer friends wept; Fewer neighbors were crippled; Fewer parents had to bury their children.

At the dawn of the 20th century, for the first time, humanity banished the enemy from entire regions of the world. Humanity faltered many times in its efforts, but there individuals who never gave up, who fought for the dream of a world where no child or loved one would ever fear the demon ever again. Viktor Zhdanov, who called for humanity to unite in a final push against the demon; The great tactician Karel Raška, who conceived of a strategy to annihilate the enemy; Donald Henderson, who led the efforts of those final days.

The enemy grew weaker. Millions became thousands, thousands became dozens. And then, when the enemy did strike, scores of humans came forth to defy it, protecting all those whom it might endanger.

The enemy’s last attack in the wild was on Ali Maow Maalin, in 1977. For months afterwards, dedicated humans swept the surrounding area, seeking out any last, desperate hiding place where the enemy might yet remain.

They found none.

35 years ago, on December 9th, 1979, humanity declared victory.

This one evil, the horror from beyond memory, the monster that took 500 million people from this world – was destroyed.

You are a member of the species that did that. Never forget what we are capable of, when we band together and declare battle on what is broken in the world.

Happy Smallpox Eradication Day.

I handed out, like, 15 copies of this essay today!


Tags:

#illness tw #history #anniversaries #proud citizen of The Future #may or may not have reblogged this before

KUEC Transcripts – Episode 1

{{Title link: http://kevinandursulatranscripts.dreamwidth.org/600.html}}

justice-turtle:

LOOK WHAT I DID I DID A THING :D

It’s on Dreamwidth because I don’t trust Tumblr to handle a two-hour episode transcript when I get there, and also I understand Dreamwidth more. I’m going to try to link each episode here as I finish it, though.

Anybody wants to volunteer to help transcribe episodes, just let me know and I’ll give you posting access on Dreamwidth. I’mma be playing catch-up for a while here by my lonesome… XD

Yay! It exists!

I’m going to be kind of busy the next few days, but maybe afterward I can find time to pitch in.


Tags:

#Kevin and Ursula Eat Cheap #transcripts

New law makes Canadian Jews second-class citizens | Toronto Star

ilzolende:

nuclearspaceheater:

ayellowbirds:

quasi-normalcy:

So here’s a terrifying implication of Canada’s new citizenship law that I’ve not heard anyone mention before.

I expected this when I heard about the standards of the new law :

Can a Jew formally renounce their Right of Return in a way that Israel would consider binding?

IDK, maybe Israel would be willing to accept some conditional renunciation of the right? Probably not, though.

This seems like a mess.

to hell with Judaism I’m American

I thought I was safe the day I took the oath

“Welcome home,” they said

(we’ll see what “they will consider expanding“ means)


Tags:

#the people in this riding are ever so polite #they are kind and they do not insult you to your face #they may even believe on some level that they like me #but they’re going to elect *him* again #oh I’ll do my part to fight it #I’ll cast the vote he didn’t think I should have #and it’s not going to work #I see those blue signs all over town and I think of every proudly xenophobic message he’s had placed in our mailbox over the years #one time he talked about asylum seekers from the European Union #he said it was suspicious #as if anyone from such an advanced place could *possibly* need asylum #(I don’t think he used ‘advanced’ but that was basically the implication) #he said this a couple weeks after I saw news about a mob in Hungary trying to lynch a Romany family #to this day it is what I think of when I think of him #our home and cherished land #(it says it in every post I make about Canada) #(the elephant in the room) #(the unspoken word) #(*native*) #tag rambles