#innovation fallacy

[satireinfo]

The H-1B Visa Program Controversy

The H-1B Visa Program: Importing Cheap Labor, Exporting Common Sense From Specialized Talent” to “Specialized Savings How the H-1B Visa Program Became America’s Favorite Outsourcing Hack Washington, D.C. — The H-1B visa program, originally pitched as the crown jewel of immigration policy to attract the “best and brightest,” has devolved into a chaotic mess of wage suppression, worker…

[literaryvein-reblogs]

more words for characterization (pt. 4)

Age

adolescent, afresh, ancient, antiquarian, antique, big, childish, crude, doddering, elderly, fresh, full-grown/full-fledged, green, hoary, immemorial, infant/infantile, junior, late, medieval, mint, modish, new, novel, older, old-fashioned, originally, outdated/out-of-date, passé, quaint, refreshing, secondhand, stale, state-of-the-art, undeveloped, up-to-date, well-preserved, youthful

Appearance

adorable, aesthetic/esthetic, artistic, beautiful, comely, crisp, dapper, decorative, desirable, dressy, exquisite, eye-catching, fancy, fetching, flawless, glorious, good-looking, graceful, grungy, hideous, homely, irresistible, natty, ornate, plain, pretty, refreshing, resplendent, seductive, spiffy, striking, stylish, ugly, unbecoming, willowy, with-it

Genuineness

abstract, actually, alias, apocryphal, apparently, arty, authentic, baseless, beta, bona fide, circumstantial, concrete, contrived, credible, deceptive, delusive, dreamy, ecclesiastical, empirical/empiric, enigmatic/enigmatical, ersatz, ethereal, factual, fallacious, fantastic, far-fetched, fictitious, foolproof, fraudulent, good, hard, historical, honest-to-God, illusory/illusive, imitative, indisputable, invisible, just, lifelike, made-up, magic/magical, make-believe, matter-of-fact, metaphysical, monstrous, mystic/mystical, mythical/mythological, nonexistent, openhearted, ostensibly, paranormal, physical, positive, pretended, quack, quite, realistic, right, sincerely, specious, spurious, supernatural, synthetic, tangible, true, unearthly, unnatural, unthinkable, unvarnished, unworldly, valid, veritable, wholehearted/whole-hearted, wrong

Movement

ambulatory, brisk, clumsy, fleet, fluent, frozen, gawky, graceless, immobile, indolent, itinerant, leisurely, lifeless, liquid, lithe, maladroit, migrant/migratory, motionless, moving, nomadic, oafish, passive, pendulous/pendent, portable, restless, roundabout, sedentary, slow, speedy, static, vibrant, winding

Style

adorable, baroque, becoming, black, bold, brassy, cheap, class, classy, contemporary, country, cultural, dashing, dowdy, eat high on the hog, exquisite, featureless, flamboyant, floral, flowery, formless, futuristic, garish, gay, glamorous, gorgeous, grand, graphic, hot, improvised, informal, innovative, kinky, loud, lush, luxurious, mean, meretricious, modish, neat, new, obsolete, old-fashioned, orderly, ornamental, ostentatious, outdated/out-of-date, palatial, picturesque, plush, posh, prevalent, quaint, refined, resplendent, rustic, scruffy, sharp, simple, sleazy, smart, snazzy, spiffy, spruce, stately, state-of-the-art, stylish, swank/swanky, tacky, tasteless, tousled, two-bit, unbecoming, unworldly, up-to-date, vogue

NOTE

The above are concepts classified according to subject and usage. It not only helps writers and thinkers to organize their ideas but leads them from those very ideas to the words that can best express them.

It was, in part, created to turn an idea into a specific word. By linking together the main entries that share similar concepts, the index makes possible creative semantic connections between words in our language, stimulating thought and broadening vocabulary.

Source ⚜ Writing Basics & Refreshers ⚜ On Vocabulary

[komsomolka]

VEB Scharfenstein, with four production units in the GDR, produced household refrigerators not only for the home market but had export partners in 30 countries. Just prior to unification it was producing over a million fridges and freezer units per year. [...] Everyone in the factory feared for their jobs because even though it had been the biggest manufacturer of refrigerators in the Eastern Bloc, by 1992 it was facing bankruptcy. In an attempt to save jobs and give the company a new lease of life, one of the company’s engineers, Albrecht Meyer, together with the West German environmentalist, Wolfgang Lohbeck, made a technological breakthrough, enabling the company to manufacture more environmentally-friendly refrigerators. In their research and development the company collaborated with Greenpeace and the Dortmund Hygiene Institute to develop the world’s first refrigerator free of chlorofluorocarbon and hydrofluorocarbon. Instead of using chemicals that damage the ozone layer, the new units used gases like propane and butane for cooling. The company was renamed ‘Foron’ and went on to produce 650 million of the new units after its reorganisation.

This innovation represented a serious threat to the market dominance of traditional refrigerator manufacturers in the West. They immediately countered with a massive and disingenuous propaganda campaign condemning the new system fallaciously as dangerous and environmentally unfriendly. This campaign succeeded in ruining Foron’s reputation – the political climate made it easy to deprecate an East German product. Foron was forced out of the market and in 1996 it went bankrupt and was taken over by a Dutch company.

On the insistence of Greenpeace, the new technology developed by Foron had not been patented because Greenpeace wanted it to be adopted quickly by other manufacturers. When those other companies did eventually begin manufacturing similar ones they could make free use of Foron’s technology without having to buy any patents. That was an additional bitter pill. In the meantime, most manufacturers have taken on the technology developed by Foron and it has now become a standard for the environmentally-friendly manufacture of refrigerators worldwide.

Stasi State or Socialist Paradise? The German Democratic Republic and What Became of It by Bruni de la Motte & John Green with Seumas Milne (Contributor), 2015.

[fountainpenguin]

Dimmsdale Rich Families Analysis

Misc. musings that haunt me daily...

I love Dimmsdale's rich families... You've got the Dimmadomes who are all about real estate, fancy buildings, hosting city events, and (Thanks to Dale) they got into tech and shipping.

Contrast that with the "old-fashioned pencil and paper" vibes of the Leadlys, plus the Buxaplentys running the trains... It's a triangle of supporting each other's businesses (and thus, the rich get richer).

This post written under the assumption we're treating these episodes as canon, though I cherrypick "Country Clubbed" in my worldbuilding and I use Dimmsdale's founding year from Season 3 over the one given in Season 9.

General Background

Several flashback episodes imply the FOP world exists in a timeline where the English settled at least part of the west coast in 1665 (as opposed to the Spanish).

- Presumably, this is one of the unique things a universe-hopper like Jimmy Neutron would identify this world by. - On that note, people are heavily implied to "stand differently" in the FOP world, which is why visitors from other dimensions react with surprise when they see their bodies (and fall over before they get their footing):

Just some fun "alt reality" vibes. Enjoy your visit; sea legs required.

Notably, this is also a universe where trains existed on the west long before they existed in ours, but we'll get to that.

Today I'm discussing the Dimmadomes, Leadlys, and Buxaplentys, but for anyone who's interested in learning more about rich families, Season 9's "Country Clubbed" namedrops a bunch.

Dimmadome Family

We know the Dimmadomes for their impact in the modern world- they're always innovating, hopping from one thing to the next. Dale does seem to have consistency in the businesses he owns (though I am DYING to question what his plans are for that indoor amusement park).

Doug doesn't seem able to commit to anything for long, though we know he's very proud of the Dimmsdale Dimmadome. He hosts many events throughout the series, from music shows to wrestling to demolition derbies.

Dimmsdale was founded in 1665, named after Dale Dimm (following him throwing Alden Bitterroot the witch down a well). It's possible Dale Dimm is an ancestor of the Dimmadomes, given what we know about:

- Dimmadomes having their hand in things (including the founding of Dimmadelphia). - One Dimmadome ancestor using the surname Dimm ("Lost and Founder's Day"). - Dale Dimm's very tall, barefoot figure is a hilarious ancestor choice for Doug "tall hat" and Dale "boot obsessed" descendants when you think about it.

While it's heavily implied Dale was born into generational wealth, we can't confirm whether that was (or wasn't) true for Doug. It's possible his family helped him get his start, but he seems to have kicked off his own success story by mining for gold (Presumably at a young age given that was back in 1953 and the main FOP series kicks off in 2001).

I like to think Doug (prior Dale's birth) changed his family's surname to Dimmadome to move away from the negative connotation of Dimm and commit himself fully to his big and shiny brand image.

Doug's a pretty interesting character! He's not afraid to get involved in his projects and work hard personally, as opposed to outsourcing- a trait he and his son Dale seem to share.

Doug also seems pained to surrender a check to Timmy in "Odd Ball" (even asking for a minute to say good-bye to his money), which isn't far off from Dale's attitude towards stocks.

He was even down to move to Alaska to follow the Ballhogs basketball team. He loves throwing all his chips on the table and doesn't back out easily. He also goes all-in with promotional outfits, like the parka above or his chicken costume in "Chicken Poofs."

That said, he might have some "sunk cost fallacy" views towards some of the stuff he buys. While the basketball team cheered they'd won the game by a close shave, Doug's first remark was that now he'd have to figure out what to do with all the stuff he bought in prep for their move to Alaska. He immediately started eating the Blubber Nuggets he would no longer be able to sell.

In "Chicken Poofs," when Doug sees the town inside his restaurant's chicken-dunking cages, his first thought isn't "Oh my gosh, I have to save these people." It's "These people stole my chickens- I'm ruined!" However (at Timmy's advice), he comes back from the loss of his chickens by selling the eggs they left behind. He wasn't about to go home empty-handed.

I'm obsessed with Doug's chicken-dipping machinery having labels so the thing one step up from Deep Fry is The Sun, and the step up from Sun is Lava. When would he ever need a dial that goes that high?

A "waste not, want not" attitude is fascinating in contrast to Dale being so incredibly wasteful, he brought two single-use helicopters on his trip to the park in "Stanky Danky." Is Dale rebelling against Doug's "We have to make the most of everything" parenting style? I think that plays really well into my vision of Dale being the first born into excessive wealth, while Doug possibly worked his way up after striking gold in 1953. Dale is wasteful, Doug more practical.

Doug is also over-the-top ridiculous and would sooner work around his love for tall hats than stop wearing them.

He owns a boot-shaped phone and a laptop with an armadillo logo, apparently. I'm not sure what they were going for with the armadillo - it's probably just random or meant to represent high security - but I looked it up and in Mayan folklore, armadillos are perceived as cunning critters that outwit people and dodge consequences thanks to their shells, which... Yeah, I think that sums the Dimmadomes up pretty well. Fun fact, but armadillos are one of the only things Fairy magic can't affect ("Teacher's Pet") because magic bounces off their shells. My Anti-Fairy biology incorporates pink fairy armadillo biology because we know Anti-Fairies are also immune to most Fairy magic. Just kind of a "Hm" implication, especially since "Crock Talk"' here and "Teacher's Pet" are both Season 7 episodes. I guess the other horrifying option is that Doug eats armadillos the way you eat apples, but...

I'm also of the opinion that Doug torched things in the Learnatorium, given what we know about the Learnatorium's interior ("Totally Spaced Out") and this scene of Doug "destroying childhood memories" in "Odd, Odd West"

In fact, it's not even a reach to say Doug takes pride in destroying people's cherished childhood memories. He seems to "look down on wasteful, childish things" and seems to value anything that is more useful in performing a task or turning a profit. Again, that's big "Everything must be useful and we can't waste space" energy (and presumably reflects on his offscreen parenting).

Where my fanworks are concerned, I love the idea that Doug paid for personal tutors to help Dale adjust to society and/or some basic schooling. Say... maybe an elementary teacher to start with? I don't think it would be unreasonable to theorize Crocker was involved with that, at least at first, as it helps justify the money he would've needed to expand the Crocker cave in the early days. -> We know from S4's "Genie Meanie Miney Mo" that Mr. Birkenbake states he can't afford a garage because he "doesn't make Crocker money," implying resentment... which is pretty interesting when you consider that Crocker also doesn't have his own place because he moved back in with his mom after university, and not even to his old room (Instead to a room above the garage). -> We know from S6's "Wishology Pt. 2" that Crocker stole the money intended for "the school's new science wing" and used that to pay for some of his tech, like his rocket. Both these episodes come well after S2's "Nectar of the Odds," so it's interesting to consider Crocker getting money earlier to support his tech pursuits in Seasons 2 and 3.

Dale seems to feel strongly about his dad- If it's not love, it's obsession and Grade-A Daddy Issues. His tent is shaped like his dad's head - despite Doug not being present at the event as far as we know - and even his house features statues of his dad.

Considering the nervous, over-the-top, aggressively money-chasing person Dale turned out to be, it's no surprise we can see a lot of Dale in Doug. While Vicky did a number on Dale's psyche, there's definitely some Doug influence in his behavior too.

Fun Fact: The Dimmadome gives off Roman Colosseum vibes, so it's fitting that one of the ancestors we saw in "Lost and Founder's Day" is an ancient Roman!

I would also be remiss not to look at the Dimmadome fortune, glance at the sheer number of businesses Doug is constantly opening... and question if there's some money laundering going on there. Seems kinda sus, ngl...

I'm just saying, Doug with a ton of "disposable income" (gold) because he ended up with a lot of it very quickly seems like a "great" way to get into gambling. Shout-out to the Dimmadomes and their obsessions that hint at addictive personalities. Actually, that makes Dev's game addiction so much darker and now I'm horrified. He could get into trouble so easily...

Also, in "Engine Blocked," Doug literally tries to pay Vicky with a bunch of [I assume fake] money with his face on it, so that's questionable...

One last interesting note is that the Dimmadrones (called such in "Stanky Danky" when chasing Cosmo, Wanda, and Hazel) are clearly based on the early model of Amazon delivery drones.

I think the obvious assumption is that Dale* built them for Dimmazon, but repurposed a few of them for Dev's caretaking (as opposed to them being built for Dev in the first place).

* It's possible the robots were built by a team, but knowing Dale programmed the statues in "Lost and Founder's Day" & Dale's seeming preference to do things himself rather than outsourcing, I'm going with the "Dale built them" theory.

This repurposing might be backed up by Dev referring to the ones that hang out with him as au pairs - a phrase meaning "caretaker" - and even claiming his au pairs are Au Pair #1 and Au Pair #2. While that might just be convenient shorthand since those are the two he interacts with, maybe those are a different type of Dimmadrone that was designed (or tweaked) specifically for Dev's care.

In a previous post, I discussed my headcanon of Dev having hypoglycemia and referenced the au pairs having the ability to "alert on him," or at least use both visuals and noise to signal him, as in this screenshot from "28 Puddings Later" showcasing a glowing exclamation point:

We also know Dev has specific food needs (Lactose intolerance), that he's very picky with his food (Even a treat like cupcakes that you would expect a 9-year-old to enjoy regardless), and that the au pairs are capable of food preparation (since Dev tells Hazel in "A New Dev-elopment" they can make sushi).

The au pairs are probably the most advanced, expensive, time-consuming models (compared to the ones that simply need to be mass produced for package pick-up and put-down).

I do like the thought that - for all his faults I didn't touch on here - Dale does care enough about Dev that he took the time to design two robots that could look after Dev in his absence... and specifically, took the time to think of what a child actually needs.

Dale probably thinks "I spent 7 years struggling... I would've loved the comfort of knowing my base needs like food were taken care of."

In my hypoglycemia post, I said the au pairs seem to know what hugs are and can recognize when Dev wants comfort. That implies Dale put a lot of thought into the design of the au pair and its ability to assess Dev's needs. Dale's not oblivious to what a child needs, like safety, appropriate food, and physical affection... He just lets the au pairs handle Dev.

Dale definitely gives the impression of someone who's making a genuine effort to parent, considering he missed out on healthy role models for at least 7 years of his life (Not to mention Doug is a wild character and probably fell short of being an excellent parent himself).

Along with designing the au pairs to look after him, Dale involves Dev in his projects, greets Dev, and answers his questions, and that's so interesting when you compare him with people like:

- Remy's parents (after the shipwreck in "Fairy Fairy Quite Contrary"'s closing scene) opting to count their surviving money and open a luxury hotel while still dressed in rags, forcing Remy to forage for his and their survival - Vicky and Tootie's parents opting to stay with perceived cannibals rather than disobey Vicky ("Timmy's 2D House of Horror"); they consistently let Vicky run the show and beg her forgiveness when they upset her. You could 100% make an argument that Vicky is Tootie's actual caregiver. - The "Fairy Idol" alt version of Bucky (Chester's dad) who lost his house and went off to party instead of securing food or shelter for his son. Also, Regular Bucky canonically feeds Chester animals he stole from the zoo or aquarium ("Who's Your Daddy?") and I think we should talk about that. - A.J.'s parents are fantastic in many ways, but there's something incredibly dark about the way they don't like A.J. going outside where there are germs ("Who's Your Daddy?"), they have a laser set up in front of their house to vaporize visitors ("The Big Scoop"), and A.J. seems to believe they dislike Chester (given his long silence after Chester asks why A.J.'s parents' security system got more aggressive after finding out he was Chester). - Later-season neglectful Timmy's parents (though I acknowledge I don't love that flanderized aspect of their character unless viewed from the 'got burned out after 50 extra years of parenting' lens, personally). - Clark and Connie who walked out on their daughter having an anxiety attack (and sent Chloe into a dissociative episode 3 times in the first episode they appeared). - A distracted adult Timmy ("Channel Chasers") leaving his kids with a robot Vicky babysitter despite the sight of weapons and his children begging.

Dale IS an antagonist and a neglectful parent. This post is not meant to take away from that or excuse it, but I think it's interesting that within the bounds of FOP characterization... He is pretty consistently in line with how parents in this show behave, and he does have many positives alongside his flaws. I totally understand why child protective services have not taken Dev from him.

Disclaimer: All characters are morally gray and this list is for amusing discussion purposes. I'm not calling these characters "bad parents" so much as highlighting interesting behaviors for consideration.

FOP's characterization leans into adults being foolish and neglectful - Dimmsdale is named after the idea that the adults are dim, after all - and I think it's worth evaluating all the FOP parents within that framework.

Related Dimmadome Posts:

- This post where I had the thought that Doug might have ADHD/OCD comorbidity (Hilariously, something I'd already decided to do with Dale and Dev...)

- This post comparing Doug and Dale body language

Leadly Family

S9's "Dog Gone" is a bonkers episode, and I love it so much. Notably, it's the episode that confirms Leadly is personally rich- Not just Pencil Nexus as a company, which has multiple branches in other states and can afford a jet.

In fact, Leadly is so rich, he offers to buy Sparky from the Turners for 17 million dollars, just because Sparky gave him the Heimlich maneuver and Leadly thought it was neat.

My personal headcanon for Leadly is that he's somewhat aware of magical beings and is actively seeking them.

The Leadly mansion is pencil-themed, of course.

The Dimmadomes and Buxaplentys are both confirmed to have generational wealth. We have no proof one way or the other for Leadly. It's likely his is too, but it's not impossible he founded Pencil Nexus and committed to its branding because he's proud of what he does.

Leadly doesn't have many appearances, but we know some very important things about him:

- He's convinced he's being haunted by a hot tub ghost, reason being that Cosmo likes to use his hot tub at night (whether Leadly's in it or not). Sparky also claims that he had an accident on Leadly's lawn (Crashing his car), but that Leadly blamed the hot tub ghost.

- He's super buff.

- His company is literally the only thing keeping a [presumably magical] forest from overtaking Dimmsdale, considering that when Pencil Nexus reduces their tree chopping in "The Boss of Me," the forest overtakes the city within a couple hours.

Did some godkid out there just wish for renewable trees and now Dimmsdale is cursed and suffering??

Leadly just flexes like this and has massive muscles, but his aren't as big as the people affected by the Everleadys.

The episode makes it explicitly clear that people's massive muscles are magic and aren't going away (Hence the lawsuits and decision to remove Everleady pencils from the world), but Leadly's muscles do fade when he stops flexing. His are natural.

Despite the jokes that he flies the company jet around to goof off, it's not unreasonable to think he's out there personally chopping trees and I respect him for it.

Y'know, I did wonder how on earth selling pencils made him rich enough that he can afford to spontaneously buy things for 17 million dollars (and keep a pet snow leopard that he apparently rides, considering it was tame enough for Timmy's Dad to ride it home from work and he parked it outside his house and it just stayed there).

Did he fight the snow leopard? Did he raise it? I'm afraid of him.

Conclusion: Ed Leadly has a monopoly on an infinitely replenishing wood source. His company can never take a break or the city will be overtaken by magic plants. Big "curse of Midas" vibes.

I can't stop thinking about how in "T.U.F.F. Puppy," it's implied that Petropolis exists in the same general location as Dimmsdale... Los Angeles county:

- Los Angeles' population in the 2010 census was 3,792,621. Dimmsdale's hillside letters parallel the Hollywood sign. - 91502 is the Burbank area code, where the Nickelodeon studio is - Jorgen claims in "Meet the OddParents" that the power he has to do that was vested in him by both Fairy World and Whittier, California. This seems to match the city borders seen in "Fairy Idol" while he's zooming in on Chester to assign Norm as his godparent.

This implies parallel universe vibes, though in my lore, I have all four Hartman shows blended into one continuity.

See my 2019 post, "A T.U.F.F. Timeline" or the shorter "How Hartman Shows Co-Exist" post if you want details on that

Here's the thing... In "T.U.F.F.," it's implied the forest near the city has been allowed to spread and evolve. Its bizarre flora and fauna certainly give a "non-natural evolution" vibe, so it's not implausible magic could be at play.

It's made very clear in "T.U.F.F. Puppy" that this show is still set on Earth, yet "Flower Power" refers to the Petropolis Rainforest. That implies this forest exists around the city. In fact, we know it's separate from the Amazon, which is referenced in "To Bee or Not to Bee").

Interestingly, the episode "Til Doom Do Us Part" depicts Petropolis being overrun by brightly colored flowers once weddings are mass canceled-

- which implies the florists are keeping the creep of nature back from Petropolis.

I feel like this is especially cursed in my lore where "T.U.F.F." exists in a post-FOP future... Leadly, your woods!! Oh no, he can't hear us... He's been gone for 2,000 years...

Shout-out to Pencil Nexus keeping Dimmsdale safe, one pencil at a time. And shout-out to Leadly's unique body language of gripping the sides of his coat, because he does it a lot and it makes me smile every time. He is just some background guy with a pencil-themed gimmick, but he has a special body language quirk and I love it.

Related Leadly Things:

- If you haven't watched S9's "Dog Gone," I recommend it. It's silly. There are some late-series episodes that give secondhand embarrassment vibes, but for some reason "Dog Gone"'s bizarre energy is so charming to me.

- Leadly appeared in these one-shots of mine, if you're interested in my portrayal of him hunting down magical creatures (and just generally being entitled and getting in the way): "Opportunity" & "Trying Too Hard"

Buxaplenty Family

The Buxaplentys have been running the railroads ever since Dimmsdale's early days, with Orville Buxaplenty the first to do so. Timmy's distant grandfather (Ebeneezer) mocks trains by claiming they're "just a fad" and there's no future in them- Thus, he chooses not to involve himself with trains and leaves Orville to do so alone.

This establishes the Buxaplenty wealth as being generational through these trains. Presumably, Dimmsdale has a large train station, as this seems to be where the Buxaplentys have set up shop.

If the Dimmadomes have businesses spanning Los Angeles to Dimmadelphia, it's very likely the trains play a key role. Assuming we take the 1665 founding date of Dimmsdale as canon ("Which Witch is Which?"), the trains may have been essential at moving resources from Dimmsdale to later found Dimmadelphia. -> See also, respawning magic woods (?) Rich people crossover of the centuries??

Notably, their family takes some heavy hits in "Country Clubbed" when Mr. Buxaplenty is forced to watch the destruction of the club, his mansion, yacht, and limo in quick succession.

The surname Buxaplenty is clearly a play on the phrase "bucks aplenty" (and I want to shout-out a 'fic I read many years ago - but unfortunately do not remember - that had a whole thing about Remy's surname actually being Buxley and everyone just calling them Buxaplentys in a derogatory way, because that's hilarious).

A neat detail about Remy is that in the Spanish version of Fairly OddParents, his surname is Cajallena, which (to my understanding) translates as "full cash register."

In my lore, I made Cajallena the maiden name of Remy's mom.

I did some poking around. Apparently, Remy is based on comic/cartoon character Richie Rich, popular from the 60s to the 90s or so (and who still shows up in modern reboots of things today).

I'm not familiar with this series, but both are blond, the only child in their family, and wear big red bows. After brief research, I get the impression Richie was at least a little associated with trains... even owning a toy trainset that costs 1 million dollars (and paying 8 million to buy the factory that makes a part of his set that broke).

I want to highlight this comparison:

From the Hanna-Barbera cartoon, I believe, and it looks like Richie owned other gold vehicles like a boat as well.

As for Remy himself, I believe I read a few years ago that he's designed around the concept of "green-eyed envy," so he has literal green eyes. I think envious is a very good way to describe his character, considering that his immediate reaction to learning Timmy has fairies was "If he has fairies, he could wish himself richer than me; I wish his fairies were gone."

This is a minor detail, but I rewatched some Remy scenes (especially the lunch scene in "Remy Rides Again" and the breakfast scene in "Stupid Cupid") because I could've sworn Remy said at some point that he likes caviar. That might be true - I didn't find it in my hasty rewatch - but I definitely laughed when I checked and saw that instead of eating caviar for lunch like I'd remembered, he ate steak. Kid knows what he wants.

We also know Remy enjoys Crimson Chin and Crash Nebula. Specifically, we know that he's a fan of Cleft the Boy Chin Wonder, but that when Remy ventures inside the comic world, he made the character more relatable to him by making Cleft rich... in addition to minor costume changes, such as slapping the Buxaplenty logo on him in place of Cleft's usual C.

Remy sees something in Cleft that connects with him, but that extra "I want Cleft to feel like me" bit is interesting. Admiring Cleft isn't enough. He needs to be "I am Cleft's secret identity. I, Remy Buxaplenty, have this alt life." The Crimson Chin can't seem to tell the difference between Timmy and Remy as Cleft - unsurprising since he's a comic character playing his role - but Remy saving the Chin from falling is one of the only acts of kindness we see him engage in. That implies Remy does value the Chin and/or feeling like a hero in some way... or if nothing else, he values the praise the Chin gives him.

As parents, the Buxaplentys are pretty interesting. Even by "dim FOP parents" standards, they're exceptionally bad at being loving - or even effective - parents.

- Remy's dad is so awkward, he's not even sure how to address Remy when we see them in "Fairy Fairy Quite Contrary." It's his wife that suggests he try "Son." Also, Remy's parents time themselves so they spend no more than 2 minutes per day with him, which they tell him openly.

- Remy's dad calls him "Liam" later, which isn't close to his name... but Remy's grateful to be acknowledged anyway, which has interesting implications. Remy takes anything he can get; putting up with what little scraps they offer to avoid the risk of turning them off the idea of reaching out to him.

- At the end of the episode, Timmy wishes Remy could spend more time with his parents. We can assume Cosmo and Wanda didn't want to hurt the Buxaplentys on purpose - especially given what we know (from episodes like "Boys In a Band" & "Go Young, West Man") about Da Rules preventing godkids from harming others directly.

So that begs the question... Was shipwrecking the Buxaplentys the only option to get them to pay attention to their son? That's kinda dark... Angela will turn down a book pitch to care for sick Hazel, but "Remy gets sick and a parent tends to him" was seemingly not on the table. Which does make sense in-universe- After all, there are plenty of butlers and staff who wait on Remy.

Remy even tells us that his parents stopped paying attention to him after about 3 seconds despite being stranded with him on a desert island, which is pretty bad... but it gets worse when you realize Remy was stranded between Seasons 2 and 5.

When he returns in "Remy Rides Again," he asks Timmy to "guess where he's been," and informs him he "just got back from an uncharted island."

Combining that with Remy's claim that his parents only paid attention to him for 3 seconds - and looking at the scenes of Remy foraging for food while he wears rags and his parents get involved with business despite being stranded - That's..... just awful.

That's a long time for Remy to be without the comforts of home or the comforts of Juandissimo while struggling to survive (and keep his parents alive along with him). Depending on where you personally place Timmy's time freeze, it can get way worse.

And Remy was just happy he had time with his parents... Happy to forage for food... Happy to get a headpat... and for what? They don't deserve you, kid.

For all his greediness and schemes, he is pretty grateful for what little he has. In addition to looking forward to spending time with his parents, when Remy is venting to Timmy at the end of "Remy Rides Again," not once does he mention "And I didn't have my nice things." He says "I didn't have my fairy, Juandissimo, to comfort me."

Remy's parents don't even take care of themselves, let alone pay attention to his needs. They chose not to leave the deserted island - and apparently took their sweet time calling for clothes to be delivered - and Remy seems to be the one in charge of food.

Also, the implication here is that Juandissimo gave some part of his physical form up so Remy could eat, which is horrifying?? Did that happen multiple times, considering these scenes take place immediately after the shipwreck and later after Remy's mom opens her luxury resort, so definitely different days? Did... did Remy reach the point where he was struggling to find food - or the more awful option, struggling to find food for himself because he was giving it to his parents first - and Juandissimo said "F that" ??? ... help.

On top of all this, the official canon is that Juandissimo couldn't hold a job after being separated from Remy because he was so hung up on Remy's situation (and his own shame that he failed), he couldn't stop crying, so he bounced from job to job.

It's the thing I love most about Juandissimo, because when he's introduced in FFQC, he's a huge lapdog for Da Rules, even going off about how not following them would lead to madness. But we learn one very, very important thing about Juandissimo in "Remy Rides Again"... which is that Juandissimo openly broke Da Rules to return Remy's memories.

He's very clear about this: "I decided to help you no matter what Da Rules say, so I gave you back your memories." Because he loved him... and he knew Remy's situation wouldn't get any better if he sat and did nothing. The godparenting program and Jorgen weren't going to help, so Juandissimo - who LOVES Da Rules - broke them.

We know Juandissimo returned those memories while Remy was on the island. That suggests Remy's parents had no intention to return to Dimmsdale... and presumably, they also didn't care Remy was missing school.

We know Remy got real clothes again at some point on the island, and we can assume he had food and a bed because his mom opened a luxury resort, but there's more a child needs... Schooling, medical care, social interaction with peers... everything about that situation just screams neglect. Serious neglect. "We literally do not care" levels of neglect.

Even when Remy's parents do return to Dimmsdale and care about his schooling again, they send him to a military school full of older kids and adults. And that seems at least a little reasonable on the surface - After all, Remy's been a brat, so of course they'd send him to a school for ne'er-do-wells - but that begs the question...

... What has he ever done to upset his parents?

Remy's envy leads him to be rude, sure. And he's presumably committing some kind of fraud or deception crimes in the background due to the implication in "The Big Bash" that he bribes people with checks, but puts stops on them later so they don't go through. These are things that happened when he was doing magical stuff away from home.

But all signs point to him being extremely respectful towards his parents even when they're very dismissive of him... even when he's been placed in terrible, scary situations like being shipwrecked on an uncharted island, not knowing if they'll survive. Remy is polite, does what he's told, never talks back, and volunteers to find food.

It's almost worse that his dad acknowledged Remy finding food was a good idea and still didn't lend a hand in that. The Buxaplentys are such concerning people, and that's just my recap of things that happened in Season 2 and Season 5.

According to Season 9's "Country Clubbed," Remy's dad hits "classless saps" with his limo on purpose every month - which sounds horrible even without the next part - and he does that so he has an excuse to invite them to the Fancy Schmancy Country Club and he and his friends can mock them (under the guise of allowing them access to the club in exchange for them not suing). He heavily implies he'd like to hit Timmy later since he didn't get him while hitting his parents.

That's really messed up... WHAT is going on in the Buxaplenty parents' heads?

The only slightly relieving thing from that statement is that presumably, they don't run over Remy because we can assume Remy isn't a "classless sap," but I don't think "choosing not to run your son over because he shares your wealth" is a real point in their favor.

I make no claims that Dale is a fantastic parent, but the weird thing is... I don't think Dale is outside the range of how other subpar parents in the FOP universe act. Except the Buxaplentys- They're pretty much the lowest of the low.

There are so many concerning things going on in the Dimmadome house, like terrible safety rails, and Dale does cut his son off, dehumanize him, and make him feel unwanted. This is all true.

But at least Dale knows Dev's name and calls him that. It's very possible he's aware of Dev's lactose intolerance (seeing as Dev had to get his allergy card from somewhere). At least Dale provided the au pairs to look after Dev and gave them the ability to cook and recognize when he wants a hug. Even if Dale doesn't go out of his way to hug Dev, he seems to like him enough that he's happy to clap a hand to his shoulder and talk to him. At least he seems interested in talking to him and hearing about his day.

Dale even tries to get Dev outside, but didn't snap at Dev when Dev lay down to play his game instead in "Stanky Danky." That was their father-son thing, though it would've been easy to leave Dev at home.

Dale arguably took charge of Dev's care during that event, seeing as the au pairs don't hover around Dev. idk if Dale made his 9-year-old walk home himself across a very busy road while he chased after Danky, but that's not the point.

The implication is that Dev tags along on Dale's walks to Signal Hill - and has done so many times - because Dev knows Dale's calls drop up there. It's implied Dev plays on that hill when his dad is on a call because Dev knows the grass makes you itchy if you roll down it. He'd probably played there recently since that was the first place to come to mind during the treasure hunt with Hazel, and he remembered the itchiness of the grass.

Dale even makes donations to Dev's school, which is more than the Buxaplentys ever did (See also, Remy likely missing school while shipwrecked).

Remy could die and his parents probably wouldn't spend a cent on his funeral... or get his name right in a eulogy without a lot of note-checking and effort. In fact, it wouldn't shock me if they hid his death so no one found out, because a dead son would be bad press.

Actually... It's very sad to imagine them putting more effort into hiding Remy's death than into caring for his life.

Shout-out to Chapter 10 of the 'fic "Buy Me Love" by DeliverUsFromEvie where Remy addresses two mansion employees by name, but they're confused to find out their boss has a kid and that said kid has been in the house this whole time. I think about it constantly. hey. what on earth.

This 'fic has one of the most brutal interpretations of Remy I've ever seen, and Evie has this and several other awesome works, so consider checking them out!

All of this said, there's something else that's interesting here, so let's talk "Turner Back Time."

I can't stop thinking about how when Timmy wished his ancestor (Ebeneezer) had decided to work with trains rather than dismissing them, that led to a timeline where the following things happened:

- Timmy's Dad still married his beloved Timmy's Mom (lol). Yeah, you're not prying him away from the love of his life for anything.

- Dimmsdale fell to ruin because Timmy's Dad wouldn't play the Rich People game right (Supporting the city's growth) and instead opted to drive trains off the tracks and crash them through buildings.

- The Turners lived in a mansion, but Timmy's bedroom is exactly the same, presumably because in the timeline where his family's rich, he needed a safe space untouched by his parents' branding.

- Despite Timmy's effort to become miserable, Dad kept showering him with affection and toys, so Timmy didn't qualify for fairies until he was tied to railroad tracks with a train hurtling towards him.

- The first thing Timmy did in his attempt to become miserable enough to qualify for fairies was decide not to eat... Same energy as when he felt guilty and refused to sleep in Season 1 ("Dream Goat").

There is something here about Timmy's Dad ignoring the train system, but being attentive to his son, while the Buxaplentys ignore their son, but Dimmsdale isn't in ruins.

I'll say 1 and only 1 positive thing about the Buxaplentys: At least their trains are on the tracks instead of careening through hospital walls. Honestly, the bar is so low, it is below the floor.

Timmy's Dad became a greedy person in that timeline, but he still chose to marry someone of lower social status, have a son, and be kind to his son- He's happy to greet him, encourages him to enjoy their wealth, and gifts Timmy lots of nice things. In that timeline, it's the Turners who have generational wealth. Dad was raised by generations of Turners and he still makes time for Timmy. Come on, Buxaplentys... Is it THAT hard to speak to your son like you're happy he exists?

Closing Thoughts

The Buxaplentys are definitely an old money family while the Dimmadomes and Ed Leadly give off new money energy (to me).

Neither Doug nor Ed was seen at the Fancy Schmancy Country Club in S9's "Country Clubbed." All the people who were there have names that play on wealth. They also dress in a much more "upper class" way than Leadly with his flashy yellow suit or Doug with his Southern/Western theme.

The Dimmadomes represent business-related wealth and big company vibes, and I'd call them eccentric. Compare Doug's precariously perched cliffside estate (S3's "Engine Blocked") to Remy's telescope-

I really hope he decorates that hat for the holidays

The energy I get from this is "Doug doing whatever he wants just because he can"... which is also the impression I get from the "Crock Talk" scene that shows his hat stretching through the limo roof. Doug does business things and hosts events, but keeps to himself unless he's doing business things.

Comparatively, Leadly is all-in on his pencil branding, and the Buxaplentys flaunt their wealth in everyday life. As in, they buy the most expensive version of anything they want and like to showcase their wealth.

But while Doug and Dale have "Do what I want" energy, the Buxaplentys seem more restricted by social expectation.

That is, the Buxaplentys dress very nice and dine with fancy people- even their 11-year-old wears a tux, bowtie, and cummerbund. Buxaplentys are very "Flaunt wealth & do what people expect of us." They don't go out of their way to do "silly, eccentric" things like putting a hat on their mansion, but they sure will buy golden, diamond-studded things.

Well, that wraps up my analysis on Dimmsdale's wealthy families, who each intrigue and frighten me in their own unique ways... whether that be money laundering, holding back a magical forest, or being absolutely awful parents.

Thanks for reading!

[fancobs]

Why I&'m not happy with the Inanimate Insanity finale we got and how I& would fix it

So even before the finale, I& had my& theories on how it was all going to end. To me& it was obvious that there was a thematic throughline in the narrative that was going to lead to a simple yet powerful conclusion.

If you were to analyze the themes present in II, you will consistently find complex characters, ones that hurt others in the past, yet have found ways to change themselves and improve, regardless of whether they're forgiven or not. Balloon, Taco, Knife, Nickel... even MePhone4.

When it started becoming clear that Cobs was going to be a central character in the story, to me& it was obvious that he would go through a similar arc. Let me& explain.

The way I& think it could have gone is, Suitcase and Knife escape from that cell with the help of Bow possessing Apple, but don't run away from the ship entirely. They can't - their job isn't over yet.

One thing about Suitcase is that she values honesty a lot. Cobs wasn’t selfless when he told them the truth about their existence - it is quite obvious it was a tactic to get them on his side - but it was still the truth. And Suitcase can also tell that the story isn't quite complete yet, because there is still a question that hasn't been answered.

So, with the help of Toilet and Bow, Knife and Suitcase hunt Cobs down in the ship and pin him down. That X model that Toilet can control perhaps comes in handy, too. But despite what Knife wants to do, Suitcase stops him and confronts Cobs with words. All she asks is: Why are you doing this?

Of course, Cobs initially tries to pull some bullshit about how he's doing it for the progress, or for money, or even for the sake of the sake of the contestants themselves, but before he can even finish his sentence, Suitcase shuts the excuses down and repeats the question again: No REALLY. Why?

"The Future Is So Yesterday" is playing muffled quietly in the background so that in the brief moment of stunned silence, you hear the lyrics "So Cobs, is your whole persona intended / To keep those suspicions extended / So all your schemes become blended / And your work cannot be contended?", hinting towards how he's cornered in this moment, and to highlight how he's merely playing a persona.

So this is when we get a MePhone4-style flashback moment into Cobs's memories, in a moment when he gets hit with all the realizations and cannot evade the doubts anymore.

So, if you've been paying close attention, you'll notice that Cobs himself doesn't have a very positive relationship with his parents. He says so himself in "Theft and Battery" when he shows off the garage in which he invented his first computer. It is not hard to see how perhaps the pressure from family and a bit of gifted kid syndrome made him think that he has to monetize his hobbies, and eventually led to him tying his company's financial success to his personal self worth.

This is important to the analysis - it's not just greed that pushes him to attack the aliens, the stakes are much higher from his perspective because if the company fails, everything he's ever worked on for his whole life is destroyed.

And so, he's pushed by external factors to do horrible things. At first with good intentions (progress and innovation), although at some point it's undeniable that sunk cost fallacy would sink in.

All of this would get visualized through little scenes of his past, depicting this slow descent. But then we would get a scene of another thing he canonically admitted to doing - watching the show, and finding comfort in it.

You see, there's gotta be something that caught his attention and made him this deeply obsessed with the show. And would it really be a stretch to say that, especially with how it's basically confirmed that MePhone4 was basing some of the characters on the things he saw in Cobs, that perhaps he sees those parallels to himself and that changes him?

Remember Marshmallow's grief over how the competition pushes you to be your worst self? To play a persona that isn't really you?

He's not completely ready to change just yet, he has too much to lose, but it undoubtedly saws the seeds for it in his mind. He has other feelings to work through, perhaps the bitterness that he feels at seeing how MePhone4 feels more like a real person than he ever was. He feels inferior, almost like he's failing at his one and only purpose in life. And we know for a fact that Cobs is a complete and total perfectionist - of course these standards he has apply to himself too.

That is why he decides to take the matters in his own hands for the show, and the things that we see and get reminded of in the flashback.

But now, we return back to the present. Cobs is pinned down, disarmed, surrounded by the very contestants that helped his own revelations, and for the first time, someone is actually asking about the real him. He's helpless - Knife has taken the blade in his pocket away, and he can't escape. He cannot dodge the question, and at this point, he realizes that there's not really a way out for him.

Why did he do this? He confesses quietly: "Because it's all I've ever known." And here we have another comparison point - where MePhone4 said this with a pleading desperation, Cobs says it with determination. It's all he's ever known, that's why he did it and that's why it's all he'll ever do. Hurt others like his parents hurt him, and like he hurt himself. To him, that's just a fact of life, and one he prides himself in.

And here is where the main point of this essay and rewrite is - I& want to see Cobs change, get the same character arc as the others have gotten. I& want Suitcase and the others to go and firce him to apologize to MePhone4. He doesn't need to forgive him - in fact, it'd be more fitting if he didn’t - but I& want to see Cobs give his company away to 3GS or MePad, to resign from his past of cruelty, and to have at least someone (perhaps even Suitcase, who has always seen the best in people such as Balloon) support him in this journey.

I& hope you can see from the examples I&'ve provided throughout this essay how this is a much more natural and logical conclusion to this story. I& was extremely disappointed to see that the ending painted Cobs in such a one dimensional light - especially since, unlike the contestants that were intentionally created to be flat and simple, Cobs is supposed to be an actual real person, and it just does not make sense that the theme of self improvement and forgiveness seen so thoroughly throughout the show wouldn't apply to him.

The only thing I&'m not sure how to include in this ending is the Box and MeLife lore. Those parts of the finale were genuinely fascinating and enjoyable, and I& would love to hear other people's suggestions on how we could still have the lore revealed while also giving Cobs a more thoughtful and well rounded ending.

[probablyasocialecologist]

The deference of the Reeves-Lammy doctrine to the current obsessions of the US-led global order – the whizz-bang of investment, tech, supply chains, big strategy – relegates consideration of the humdrum world of public services to a footnote. But the latter is, quite rightly, people’s first priority. People with no training in economics readily understand a simple fact: you can’t go to work if you don’t have good health, means of looking after yourself, a decent place to sleep, a system of care for your loved ones. It is precisely the under-performance of all of these features of daily life that has driven the rise of the far right. The obvious way to reduce the salience of these views is to dramatically increase current spending on public services – that is, precisely the option that fiscal rules militate against. ‘More money for the NHS’, as the saying goes, relies on ‘growth’ first. But there is an obvious fallacy here. The steep rise in economic inactivity of recent years is a result of ill health. Even by the reductive and economistic terms of capitalist governance, the current approach is fatally flawed. One can readily outline an alternative: sharp increases in wages, an expansion of public spending on universally accessible services, price controls on essentials, coordination and control of investment at the national level – these would produce the robust demand upon which actual ‘innovation’ depends. But the Government has sacrificed this option in its quest for fiscal stability.

Adam Blanden, Labour in Government: What Happens Now?

[ellierenae]

My publishing rights finally returned to me, so I can present you with a $0+ digital copy of my debut short story...

“We find that the relationship between conscious thought and physical action is that of correlation, not causation. The body needs no consciousness to function. Moreover, consciousness is found to have no tangible purpose. Through psychiatric innovation, it may be discarded entirely.” - Bodily Autonomy and Other Fallacies (5th ed.)

Featured in The Dark Corner: this fast-paced thriller with a sapphic antihero starts in a psychiatric hospital and ends in hell. After undergoing treatments for her violent tendencies, not experimental but long-since approved, Nora will learn that there are many worse things than death.

Content warning: violence, needles, death, SA, and an irredeemable protagonist.

Available on Gumroad at no charge.

[greyriversands]

I wonder about the balance between tradition/innovation in paganism sometimes. On the one hand, I think if modern paganism is to be a vibrant modern spirituality, to some extent it does need to disconnect from history and innovate. Not just in ritual forms, but to an extent, in terms of figures venerated, in terms of festivals, myths, etc. Every god was worshipped for the first time by a human once, had it's name or myth told for the first time. So in our modern age, it would be good and healthy to have such processes too. Not out of nowhere, as in someone just sitting down to make up a religion out of nowhere, but gradually. I think UPG needs to be a lot more highly valued than it is.

But at the same time, since the "the older the better" fallacy is so common in our western culture (see: all those medieval and late antique people claiming their esoteric writings were actually from Zoroaster/Hermes Trismegistus/Pythagoras/Solomon etc.) it's so easy for that to get tangled up in either misrepresentations of history or cultural appropriation in an effort to lend the innovation legitimacy.

It's a really thin line to walk, especially because a lot of that innovation will be a very gradual growing apart of practice and history. Like, how do you keep a practice not completely dependent on academic history, but also not so loose from it it starts to go against what we know?

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

Not all gender norms are as easily smashed.

Some slip through the net of public compassion, and none more so than the antiquated stereotype that ‘men cannot be victims of domestic abuse’, and that ‘women cannot be violent’.

Yes, it’s true...

Women can be breadwinners and career animals, CEOs and political leaders, high fliers, and business moguls, every bit as successful, smart, and innovative as their male peers.

And the outdated ideas of womanhood, that disallowed such things, are the stereotypes we all love to smash, stomp down, and kick into the dirt.

As we should.

But what about women’s capacity - not for roaring Fortune500 success - but their capacity for violence, and abuse?

And what about men’s capacity to be the victim of such things?

But dare utter the idea of violent women.

And there it is… Silence.

Nothing.

Where have all the whoops and cheers, the grandstanding, and pats on the back gone?

And where are our noble champions of women’s autonomy?

Why has the feminist movement, that lead the vanguard of fighting gender norms, been so reluctant to confront this one?

Or worse, why do so many of these people protect such stereotypes themselves?

In time, people have finally come to accept that men can be abused by women, but often with the caveat that these men are ‘not often injured’, or ‘they don’t fear abuse as women do’.

But yet again, the most recent data exposes these ideas as yet more harmful gender norms – the norms that most of society are too gutless, or disinterested, to confront.

So I ask you, why are we so reluctant to discuss violent women, and vulnerable men?

And who pays the price for our unwillingness to talk about them?

--

ONS Data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/datasets/partnerabuseindetailappendixtables

Deborah Powney debunks others myths: https://tinyurl.com/yuf4s3xs

==

For the online keyboard warrior who doesn't get paid, the dishonesty is much easier to explain. They've built an entire edifice of claims - and their entire personality around those claims - based on a specific model of how the world works. When the world doesn't just not work according to that model, but runs directly counter to that model, the entire model falls into disrepute. And that puts the person's entire identity, built on sand, at risk.

This is not unlike how when Xians admit that Genesis is not literally true, the rest of the bible quickly collapses. The resuit, in both cases, is post hoc rescues, rationalisations, contradictions, fallacies and outright lies (e.g. "there's no evidence for evolution," or "all female violence is self-defence").

The model must be protected at all costs, no matter how bogus, in order to protect the adherent's identity.

[calxvace]

a loyal devotee entertained barbatos quite while, everyday they go to his statue, pray, sing, sometimes tell tales, and before they leave, they offer a gold coin.

Not the usual ones, this devotee claims this gold was made by him. He was a weaponsmith from a far away land, long exiled from his home, the devotee found his way to a statue of barbatos providing him a spring breeze to sigh on about his griefs and regrets in life.

"lord barbatos, do you think someone like me deserves a heart?" exhaling his hopes, the devotee places a gold coin and this time, together with a letter.

"Dear Lord Barbatos,

I have long told you my desire to innovate a working warm heart to the cold clunky body of mine. I am confident on my artisanship but to my concern it would turn to a heart of sorrow as whatever my hands lays upon seeps the very purpose of my existence—destruction. As a loyal devotee, going to your statue was not even a task. To freely tell, sing, and pray was a moment I found dearly for I am with the winds. You might wonder why I have written this instead of the usual tales, I have been summoned to the service of another god in exchange for the the very thing I have wanted. This does not mean I'm turning my back to you, your guidance have felt the warmest I've ever been and betraying you would mean I'd lose myself again. For if ever I forget my devotion, I leave this letter together with the first cecilia I've picked, a reminder of you.

And so, this is a goodbye

but goodbyes means see you later

I will be back my lord."

it has been 500 years since, but not once did the devotee came back. Barbatos was a god proud of preaching freedom yet the god could not sit idly knowing one of his people is driven by false hope and fallacious fidelity.

riding with the wind, barbatos guised himself as a normal traveler in the face of his old friend as usual and roamed around sumeru city gathering information on the commotion he has heard from few of his informant.

Barbatos as the closest link to istaroth was not affected by the samsara and could easily pinpoint that his devotee has ascended to divinity is now proclaimed as the Shouki no Kami.

Barbatos could not intervene- no he should not intervene, after all, archons could not interfere to other nations' major conflicts unless reached upon.

after all the irminsul conflict has been resolved, he now can see for himself of what his once loyal devotee had chosen. Barbatos is watching, he knows soon the devotee will call for him.

Barbatos was right, in the verge of a critical moment, he heard the devotee's plea, he heard his will to overcome his grief and grievances, barbatos perceived his strong sense of freedom, and so he grants him a vision.

the power and guidance of anemo shone through the brightest, scaramouche- wanderer has never seen his ambition this lucid.

"my lord... you were always my guidance"

After overcoming shouki no kami, the devotee decided to visit the very statue it all started, and where it almost ended.

It was still the same, the breeze accompanies him but this time he no longer pray, sing, and tell tales to the statue.

He now speaks with the ever denying bard,

"I'd order barrels of wine if you told me lord barbatos, one moment please! I have a lot to tell, the longest tale you'll ever hear"

Venti sighs placing down his wooden lyre, "Kunikuzushi how many times do I have to tell you? I am not the anemo archon!"

But as a loyal devotee, and a species different from humans, wanderer knew it was barbatos in front of him.

"alright, fine, and I won't ask you why you knew my name from 500 years ago, but I decided to go with wanderer now"

"wanderer? okay, wanderer... I could listen to your tale in exchange of a dandelion wine! not barrels! but a bottle"

venti just giggled at his little mistake and the thought that one of his children decided to incorporate wind into their name.

"yes, wanderer, like how the wind wanders"

quite a stretch but this is how i like to imagine where venti and wanderer's relationship roots (god and loyal devotee). +

scaramouche who's scared of another betrayal and venti who never lets his people suffer, always there to guide his people even when he's slumbering. wanderer finds it comforting to know there is someone whose vocab does not involve betrayal but he's just shy to admit it and venti understands that. As nahida took him in, venti often checks on wanderer.

in short uncle venti is born the moment scara receives his anemo vision

[donnerpartyofone]

I signed up for this online class co-taught by a woman I find maddeningly brilliant, where she lectures on her experience working with and studying people who are on the cutting edge of whatever their professional field is. She discovered this common thread where many of them claim that they don't come up with their innovations on their own--supposedly, ideas just enter their minds spontaneously, or even in a dream, and they follow these disciplined lifestyles (versions of monastic practices, generally) that they believe make them more receptive to those kinds of messages. A good clarifying example is that of a mathematician (Pattie Maes I think? I forgot to write it down) who claimed that as a young student, she would just-know the solutions to math problems without being able to explain the reasoning, so she was always in trouble with her teachers; eventually she got into analytical philosophy, which helped her reverse-engineer and understand the answers she mysteriously received. So anyway the class I'm taking allows you to offer up your own projects for feedback and advice about how you can invite a breakthrough to happen. There are some extremely interesting people in the group, including a couple of guys who are doing futuristic-sounding sustainable farming projects, someone who studies black holes, and just all stripes of scientists and artists. I'm hearing some pretty interesting things, but...

The class is co-taught by this woman who is also obviously brilliant, she has these insane credentials I barely understand involving venture capital and AI, she works with and for extremely high level companies and luminaries and her self-selected title is something like "singularity expert". And like, all of that is inherently interesting whether or not it sounds somewhat sinister to your ears, but I quickly realized that she's one of these people who is just fundamentally excited by the basic concept of Success, and she automatically thinks that any measure of fame and fortune, no matter what it's in aid of or where it came from, is evidence of genius. Which to me is like this incredibly dangerous trap, for what I think are really obvious reasons.

So one of us students brought up a manuscript she's been working on for decades that isn't going anywhere, and the singularity expert told her to just throw it out and do something else, basically. And in her justification for this, she started saying "I know a lot of you probably don't like Elon Musk, BUT" in this really bitter, cold tone of voice that let you know immediately that she's a huge fan and she thinks the resistance to him is just a bunch of ignorant liberal bullshit. And her example of his genius, which we should all imitate, is that when he wanted to make a big update to Tesla/Twitter/(some other shit he acquired from actual innovators), he found that the update was incompatible with all of foundational code, so he just threw out millions and millions of dollars' worth of code to force his new thing into place. And I mean, on one level I heard something useful and true: Don't sacrifice your future for the comforting stability of the past, beware of the sunk cost fallacy, etc. But the fact that Elon Musk did something that *appears* to represent that, depending on how you spin it, does not mean that he is a genius you should seek to imitate. First of all, I didn't leave knowing exactly what the consequences of his actions were, and second of all...millions of dollars doesn't mean anything to that guy. He's impossibly rich and he basically started out that way, and he's never going to wind up homeless or whatever even if he drives every single company he bought into the ground. He's just not a good example of someone with a high risk, high reward mindset that we should all emulate because he could lose hundreds of millions of dollars almost without noticing. The fact that he did this thing that in isolation looks heroic, that's only a tiny part of the picture with him.

(And that's without even getting into the impact that it has on the rest of the world, that he has so much power; like personally I think he's such a negative presence in the world that it's beyond just material effects, actually he's so corrosive that even talking about him is bad. Just contemplating the idea of him brings out the absolute worst in people, it's bad for people's moral fiber to even argue about him, but ANYWAY)

Unfortunately I find that a lot of people who have some kind of overlap with the self-help field will eventually come around to admitting that they're so blinded by the glamor of public, lucrative success that they don't really care where it comes from or who gets it or what people do with it. Damien Echols is someone I really enjoy, I just think it's undeniably interesting to hear from someone who spent almost 20 years on death row studying spirituality (to be glib about it) and pursuing all kinds of monastic disciplines; I mean that guy has things to say that you don't get from circulating in normal society. He practices something that has roots as far back as ancient Sumeria, he's not rich and he's not trying to get rich, but he often reminds people that poverty doesn't have an inherent moral quality and it's not inherently evil to pursue financial success. He'll say that if you have a phobic attitude toward money, if the very idea of it is tainted by guilt and fear in your mind, then it becomes a destructive force in your life--but if you think about money as energy, a resource you can channel into doing what's important to you, then it becomes something positive and supportive. And I can totally understand that. But then Echols will extrapolate that to the point that he's praising megachurch guys who are absolute crooks and scam artists and who definitely rob people through a form of psychological blackmail that tells them they're going to hell if they don't help buy Jim Bakker or whoever a private jet. And I'm like, man...ok so it's worth while to say that having a positive mindset about money can change your life for the better. But that doesn't mean that we have to then lionize every single person who ever got rich no matter how they got there and no matter what they did with their power, that's just fucking insane, right?

I could go on and on actually, about various people I've heard speak about how to break through your subconscious limitations and take a more authorial role in your own life, and how often even the most apparently well-meaning one of these speakers will come around to praising like the Monopoly guy, or some tepid pop star with an incredible marketing machine behind them, as ground-breaking geniuses who we all need to emulate. I mean a lot of people who are visibly successful get there by accident, or nepotism, or coattail riding, or plain ruthlessness. Many people in the big-success category turn out to be inarguably, unfathomably stupid (ironically I spotted the Elon Musk Pop Tart story the morning before I took this class), and some of them are only geniuses insofar as they have an abnormally well-developed predatory instinct that makes them able to think thoughts and perform actions that you really can't conceive of if you aren't, you know, a psychopath. Someone recently posted a bunch of advice on teaching from John Cale, and one of the things he said was "Suspect charisma", and I think THAT is a much more important piece of advice than like, "find someone who is rich and famous and do whatever that person appears to be doing without asking yourself how they got where they are, or just what is the real reason that you personally are so compelled by them." It seems like a lot of people respond to the aura of "success" so intensely that they just don't want to have to question it, and they'll bend over backwards crafting these speculative backstories and dialectic arguments to make their animal reaction to the spectacle of power sound like something intellectually sound. It smacks of stockholm syndrome, of people who fall in love with their own bullies. There's complicated reasons for that, some of which are what got Trump elected I think, but I don't wanna talk about that. I have to go to the doctor's now anyway, and stop thinking about this.

[kime11e]

Happy New Year to anyone who follows me on Tumblr! I'm an Australian who lives in Sydney, and LOVES all things Michael Sheen. It's 1:30am 1/1/2024, and I'm not particularly keen on crowds and loud noises so that's why you'll find me typing up this blog instead of celebrating 2024 I confess that if you follow blogs like @ingravinoveritas or @problematicwelshman, I am the Aussie Anon who happened to see Michael Sheen everyday for an entire month at my work. I would share my observations on MS while he was in Sydney to rehearse and perform Amadeus. I also have a selfie to prove it:

Yes I am under the emoji. I also saw Amadeus 3 times. My last time Anna Lundberg was sitting right behind me, where my friend was game enough to speak to her where I didn't. ANYWAY what brings me here, right now, in this instant on New Years is due to a pretty petty and possibly inane thing that Anna repeatedly did while she was in Sydney, and something she posted just now. She uses the New Zealand flag when referring to anything related to her, and her family's time in Australia. New Years last year:

Also her current Insta Story!

Look, I'm sure I'm going to get a lot of backlash for this, people saying who cares!? However Anna, as someone who is in a relationship with Michael Sheen who is a fierce and proud Welshman, and is the mother of 2 of his children. She should be delicate about using the CORRECT flag that represents a country. ESPECIALLY when in the same breath she mentions an Australian icon which is the Sydney Opera House. The SOH has been the home of Australian Art, Innovation and in a massive way Indigenous Representation (albeit the SOH was designed by a Dutch person) I don't see any excuse for using the wrong flag when referring to Australia. Especially in a world when we're learning more about expression of identity. I don't care if she has baby brain, or thought that New Zealand and Australia were one and the same because they're "Down Under". Or she thinks the flags look the same (they really don't) Or she has no time! It's no excuse to not Educate yourself! Ask questions! Yes we make mistakes but when you're representing yourself and your famous partner, you ought to take care! Yes you're human, and you have emotions, fallacies, but c'mon! You're letting yourself down!

I don't respect the Australian past of colonialism, and I wouldn't expect New Zealand to respect the same. But this flag represents us today as separate nations. Also in no way was Amadeus a duel nation production. I know the producer that's why I was able to see the show 3 times. I am losing so much respect for Anna Lundberg and I try sometimes to give her the benefit of the doubt, because let's be honest she ain't in a loving relationship save for her children, and I think Michael respects her as a friend, and mother, so it can't be easy. But it really begs me to question, how long can he tolerate the lack of self awareness? Lack of awareness in anything but beyond her bubble!? If any one responds to this please be diplomatic and tactful.

[tomorrowusa]

^^^ Job totals in millions in the US by party of the president. Those are apparently net totals which subtract losses from gains at the end of each period.

Republicans create catastrophes (i.e.: the Great Recession, the incompetent response to COVID, the Iraq Invasion, etc.) and when Democrats are subsequently elected, Republicans then complain that Dems aren't cleaning up the GOP mess fast enough.

Another useful stat regarding the economy and the parties in the past 35 years.

Number of recessions which began under Democratic presidents since 1989: 0 Number of recessions which began under Republican presidents since 1989: 4

^^^ Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Somehow, the fallacy that Republicans are "good for the economy" is still being circulated. Likely it's oligarchs and corporate billionaires who circulate it because the GOP is good for their economy. Republicans have passed three rounds of tax breaks for the filthy rich this century which have only made the rich richer and the poor poorer.

At the beginning of the Clinton administration in 1993, taxes on billionaires were raised. That began a period of innovation and prosperity not seen since the 1950s. It also led to the first budget surpluses since 1969 and a tapering off of the national debt.

If you want true prosperity, do something about income inequality. Filling the pockets of billionaires with loot only makes the filthy rich even more prosperous.

BREAKING NEWS: Did somebody mention the economy just now? 🙂

US economy added a whopping 303,000 jobs last month, far outpacing expectations

[capitalism-and-analytics]

The primary cause of the current economic state isn't inflation, though that is the excuse corporate entities use, but rather the fact that people don't have enough money to live. You see, an economy only works when money is moving. But the rich don't spend it. They hoard it. Money in the hands of the people on the other hand does get spent and moved, because people spend it to live. By refusing to put restriction on corporations, who by their nature as capitalistic entities want to move as much wealth in as few hands as possible, you make the economy worse. The truth is, the current economic state can only be blamed on the current economic philosophy. And that's capitalism.

Although I agree with your opening statement that inflation is not the primary cause of the current economic state, I disagree with the remainder of your argument.

But the rich don't spend it. They hoard it.

That is incorrect. This idea that the rich have some Scrooge McDuck style of vault where they are hoarding all this cash that is inaccessible to the rest of the economy is a blatant fallacy.

Majority of rich people fall into one of three categories:

Individuals who actively invest (i.e. spend) their capital in businesses, startups, and ventures that create jobs and drive innovation.

Individuals who let asset managers invest (i.e. spend) their capital to grow their wealth.

Individuals who save most of their capital in financial institutions and those financial institutions use those assets to invest the capital or loan out the capital to earn themselves a profit in exchange for securing the capital. This is the primary form of revenue generating activities done by banks.

Money in the hands of the people on the other hand does get spent and moved, because people spend it to live.

This is actually a very interesting point as it is very controversial and widely debated between economists for which is better for the economy to prosper: poor people's spending habits or rich people's spending habits.

Both rich and poor spending can contribute to economic growth and welfare, but they have different impacts and dynamics. While rich spending can drive economic expansion and job creation, poor spending supports local businesses and enhances the well-being of individuals within lower-income brackets. It is important to strike a balance and ensure that both groups have opportunities to participate in economic activities and benefit from a thriving economy.

[...] who by their nature as capitalistic entities want to move as much wealth in as few hands as possible, you make the economy worse.

That is incorrect. Their nature is to behave and act in pursuit of the self-interests of their private owners. If the self-interests of those individuals is to move as much wealth in as few hands as possible, then yes, but that is not a inherent characteristic or perquisite to operating in a capitalist system. Moreover, the same behavior can and does occur within socialist systems too.

The main difference though is that those self-interests are controlled by private individuals in capitalist systems and by the collective public in socialist systems.

The truth is, the current economic state can only be blamed on the current economic philosophy. And that's capitalism.

There has never been an absolute capitalist system [or absolute socialist system], but merely mixed systems. Trying to generalize any macro-economy to a singular economic philosophy is naïve and lacks critical assessment. If you wish to blame something on a capitalist philosophy, which there is plenty, then may I recommend you focusing on far more specific behaviors or policies?

[todropscience]

PLASTIC POLLUTION PREVENTION INSTEAD PLASTIC REMOVAL, RESEARCHERS SAY

A new international research highlights that plastic removal technologies have shown varied efficiency in the amount of waste material they are able to collect, in fact, plastic removal technologies used so far have have not been tested at all. Some have been shown to harm quantities of marine organisms, including fish, crustaceans and seaweeds, that far exceed the amount of plastic captured, meaning their overall impact on the ocean is potentially more harmful than helpful.

Plastics accumulates in all environments, from the highest mountains to the deepest oceans, whoever, plastic production is projected to triple by 2060, with plastic pollution increasing correspondingly under business-as-usual scenarios.

According to researchers, plastic removal technologies can temporarily mitigate plastic accumulation at local scales, but evidence-based criteria are needed in policies to ensure that they are feasible and that ecological benefits outweigh the costs. To reduce plastic pollution efficiently and economically, policy should prioritize regulating and reducing upstream production rather than downstream pollution cleanup.

There are innovations for the open ocean and the seabed that use combinations of towed nets, autonomous vessels and artificial intelligence, but researchers say that even if these technologies were to show signs of being truly effective, they would barely scratch the surface of the global problem. Cleanup practices could also lead to greenwashing through new schemes to offset the use of plastics through plastic collection.

Marine turtle trapped in a plastic fishing net, by Jordi Chias sourced from National Geographic.

Reference (Open Access): Bergmann et al. 2023. Moving from symptom management to upstream plastics prevention: The fallacy of plastic cleanup technology, One Earth.

[contentment-of-cats]

Local asshole is asshole, decides rules of physics do not apply to him.

Stockton Rush, that sterling asshole with the hubris of Ozymandias, decided that he believed in the Bulletproof Fallacy.

Bulletproof Fallacy = I have never been shot, therefore I am in fact bulletproof.

You see the problem with this.

So, in an interview in 2022, here are some key quotes via CNN:

"I'd like to be remembered as an innovator. I think it was General MacArthur who said, 'You’re remembered for the rules you break' and you know I've broken some rules to make this." 

Douglas MacArthur was not a man of genius, he was overrated and lionized right up until Harry Truman's foot met the back of his khakis.

"I think I've broken them with logic and good engineering behind me, the carbon fiber and titanium, there's a rule you don’t do that. Well, I did."

This man believed that the laws of physics did not apply to him. There are reams of articles on fatigue in carbon fiber and even in titanium.

"It's picking the rules that you break that are the ones that will add value to others and add value to society, and that really, to me, is about innovation. You know innovation is when you take an invention and you make it, you know, accepted broadly." 

Innovation is the telephone, the television, the home computer, insulin, MRI scans. Innovation is not an unclassed, uninspected, and apparently uninsured vehicle packed full of moneyed idiots who also ascribe to the Bulletproof Fallacy.

Now, not only did this disingenuous Real Man of Genius run off at the mouth about breaking the rules, dude, he could not have given a fart in a Texas twister about making sure his vehicle was fit for purpose.

Safe. If OceanGate had pursued a certification review “some of this may have been avoided,” Will Kohnen of the Marine Technology Society told CNN on Wednesday. Kohnen is president of the group’s submarine committee and described to CNN a 2018 conversation he had with OceanGate founder Stockton Rush addressing the society’s concerns. “We agreed to disagree,” Kohnen said. Kohnen drafted a letter to Rush on behalf of the group that outlined the concerns. “You are taking on a lot of risk and the risk you are taking might affect the entire industry,” Kohnen said, characterizing his concerns at the time. “We have a very good track record of safety and if something happens it would be a big impact to just…our safety record, and everybody had concerns about that.” “We told him that he should consider certifying it,” Kohnen said, describing the certification as the “gold standard” for safety. In a 2019 blog post on OceanGate's website, the company said classing agencies "do not ensure that operators adhere to proper operating procedures and decision-making processes — two areas that are much more important for mitigating risks at sea. The vast majority of marine (and aviation) accidents are a result of operator error, not mechanical failure." “There are 10 submarines in the world that can go 12,000 ft and deeper,” Kohnen said. “All of them are certified except the Oceangate submersible.” He also said a working beacon on the vessel would help searchers find it quicker "so that someone could direct themselves in that direction.”

This man was a deeply unserious person, head of a deeply unserious company, and a complete clown car of clowns waving red flags.