#industry plants

[somuchyoudontknow]

Hi! First at all, your blog is good. Second, I think Alba is another Industry Plant or she tries very hard to become the next "it girl". When WN was cancelled it, everyone worked hard for give her Mother Mary and "saved" that failed tv show. We need to wait if she keeps that roles, but remember she is a rich girl and she has privileges.

https://akajustmerry.tumblr.com/post/651348184367595520/what-exactly-is-an-industry-plant-and-how-do-you

Why the agencies doesn´t care if Alba is racist or problematic? Because they LOVE the drama, throught years they exploited it and they want every actor and singer looks like a womanizer and desirable even with young girls. This is the reason Jenny cried Chris ruined her marriage and now the story repeats with Alba because "she is so inocent and the fans are evil"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EQKOZLPpcw&ab_channel=MinaLe

I leave more information. If she succeeds and she stays in Mother Mary and WN don´t support her work. We don´t need more hideous actors.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqPX70Gy2KU&ab_channel=naomicannibal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvyFPRW9_L0&ab_channel=HumanNoResource

Hi :) Thanks for liking the blog. You have given great info. I haven't watched the vids yet but obviously I will and I will reblog the the pot too. Thanks again :)

[weluvvvkarra]

No because Tommy Richman is criminally underrated. His music is so good and I hate when people call him an industry plant but he's been making music SINCE 2019. I swear they only say that because he has like two hit songs, I swear this is why y'all need to educate yourselves on terms like not everyone can be an industry plant, like Ice Spice I understand but TOMMY! Y'all niggas are dumb ASF.

(I'm black btw)

[thatdykepunkslut]

Taylors wift is just elon musk for horse girls and gays who are afraid of faggots

[mienar]

at the artist's loft

instagram | shop | commission info

[dissectthedialoguefanpage]

ESP 2: Are Industry Plants Real?

[internetiquette]

Mill ruins from 1786

[belwoodmusic]

Leave It Out!: In Defence of 'Industry Plants'

The music industry is a bloody mess. From the absurdly broken state of modern charts, to artists’ obscenely miniscule rate of pay for Spotify streams, the modern music industry has a list of glaring issues as long as your arm. But, as human beings are want to do, we can’t help but keep adding new things to the list to complain about. The latest such talking point in music circles being buzzy…

[vintagehomecollection]

The International Book of Lofts, 1986

[nine-aetharia]

i need swifties to shut the fuck up about 'oh so kendrick's disses can be analyzed for hidden meanings but we can't do the same for taylor songs' yeah bc that's not isolated to kendrick. subliminals and entendres abound in rap. taylor swift songs are as deep as a puddle while youre wearing flip flops and your feet still arent wet

[headspace-hotel]

Researching herbicide resistance in weeds.

A decade ago, everyone said rotating applications of different herbicides was key to stopping herbicide resistance.

Then, around 2015, evidence from a large study emerged saying that this actually causes weeds to be MORE resistant, so the best thing to do is to spray a combination of multiple herbicides mixed together at once.

Now that is being called into question too. Whoda thunk it...

Herbicide resistance among weeds is only getting stronger. Recently, scientists found an annual bluegrass (Poa annua) on a golf course that was resistant to seven herbicide modes of action at once. Seven. SEVEN. Amaranth plants been found with resistance to six herbicide modes of action at once. Twenty years ago, the narrative was that resistance to glyphosate (Roundup) was unlikely to become widespread; today it's the second-most common type of resistance.

What's more, plants are developing types of herbicide resistance that are effective against multiple herbicides at once and harder to detect. Instead of changing the chemical processes within them that are affected by the herbicides so the herbicides don't work as well, they're changing the way they absorb chemicals in the first place. Resistant plants are producing enzymes that detoxify the herbicides before they even enter the plants' cells.

It took Monsanto ten years to develop crop varieties resistant to Dicamba (after weeds made 'Roundup Ready' crops pointless). Palmer amaranth evolved Dicamba resistance in five years.

So I asked, "Why are all the proposed solutions dependent on using more herbicides, when we know damn well that this is going to do nothing but make the weeds evolve faster?"

The answer is that chemical companies have the world in a death grip. They can't make money off non-chemical solutions, so chemical solutions get all the funding, research, and outreach to farmers.

But why do chemical companies have so much power?

One of the biggest reasons is the U.S. military.

In the Vietnam war, all of Vietnam was sprayed with toxic herbicides like Agent Orange, which was incredibly toxic to humans and affected the Vietnamese population with horrible illnesses and birth defects. Monsanto, the company that made the herbicides, knew that it did this, but didn't tell anyone. The US government didn't admit that they'd poisoned humans on a mass scale until Vietnam veterans started dying and coming down with horrible illnesses, and even then, it took them 40 years. (My Papaw died at 60 because of that stuff.) And the soldiers weren't there for very long. As for the Vietnamese people, the soil and water where they live is contaminated.

Similarly, during the "war on drugs," the US military sprayed Roundup and other chemicals on fields to destroy coca plants and other plants used in the manufacturing of drugs. This killed a lot of crops that farmers needed to live, and caused major health problems in places such as Columbia. The US government said that people getting sick were lying and that Roundup was just as safe as table salt. (A statement that did not age well.)

So chemical companies make money off arming the USA military. The American lawn care industry, and the agricultural system, therefore originates in more than one way from the United States's war-mongering.

The other major way is described in this article (which I highly recommend), which describes how after WW2, chemical plants used for manufacturing explosives were changed into fertilizer producing plants, but chemical companies couldn't market all that fertilizer to farmers, so they invented the lawn care industry. No exaggeration, that's literally what happened.

This really changes my perspective on all the writings about fixing the agricultural system. The resources are biased towards the use of chemicals in agriculture because the companies are so powerful as to make outreach and research for non-chemical methods of agriculture really hard to fund. All the funding is in finding new ways to spray chemicals or spraying slightly different chemicals, because that's what you can actually get ahold of money to look into. It is like the research has to negotiate a truce with the chemical companies, suggesting only solutions that won't cause lower profits.

Meanwhile my respect for Amaranth is skyrocketing.

Who would win: The USA military-industrial complex or one leafy boi

[jakeperalta]

"industry plant" is literally just the new way of saying "this female artist is having a lot of success and I don't like her for it".... like ok well personally I just don't find it that hard to believe that young women can be talented and work hard and achieve things

[elektrostantsiya]

Arabelle - GE steam turbine for nuclear power plants ☢️🏭⚡

😻/😻/😻/😻

[anghraine]

While I'm on my disruptive Tolkien opinions kick:

Yes, obviously, he was a conservative Catholic and this was really important to his understanding of the world and pervades his work and so on and so forth.

But I'm a bit "..." about reducing everything he thought and felt about the world to that. Like, yeah, there's a tradition of conservative pastoralism that meant the context of his environmental opinions was not inherently progressive in the way it can mistakenly seem in 2024. Do I think he was Like That about trees because of conservative pastoralism, or his Catholicism, or that the particular form taken by his TREES TREES TREES #OLDMANWILLOWDIDNOTHINGWRONG TREEEEEEEEES ethos much resembles most of his contemporaries' feelings?

Not really.

I mean, he would never have said it, but I kind of doubt whether his very sincere and deeply felt veneration of the actual figures of his religion was truly comparable to how he felt about things like That One Oak on the Corner That I Liked Got Chopped Down by Evildoers. I've read other conservative British writers of this era who have their own forms of pastoralism and most of them are way less intense about it. I truly don't think Tolkien loved trees the way he did Because Catholicism or whatnot. I genuinely think he just really loved trees.

Basically, I can imagine some alternate universe in which alternate Tolkien ends up with really different beliefs about religion, about politics, about all sorts of things. But I can absolutely not imagine a universe in which any version of Tolkien did not take the part of trees against all their enemies.

[nestdreaming]

[zegalba]

Karim Rashid: Crystal Bowl, Nambé, (1999)