#it’s such a unimaginably huge statement to make

[waugh-bao]

Interviewer: So tell us…where do these riffs come from? Take ‘Monkey Man', which has been making appearances in the current live shows.

Keith: I dunno, it's a facility of mine, the riff thing. I love good intros and I love a good middle breakdown that sets the thing up for the end, and I really don't know where they come from. Obviously I've listened to loads of stuff, but they're not anybody else's, they're a mixture of everything I learned really.

Also, when you play with Charlie Watts, you've got that amount of swing and rhythm behind you and it's very easy to surprise yourself. Because from my point of view I'm bouncing off Charlie Watts, we're both swapping rhythms, cutting it up, and when we get really cocky we even try and fuck each other up. 'Aha! Got you, just this once!' You can't do it on your own in an isolated thing. To come up with those sort of riffs you've got to have the drums there, 'cos that's the inspiration. So what do I say? 'Monkey Man', the riff, I got it off Charlie Watts and he doesn't even know it.

(Uncut Magazine, 2002)

[mustainegf]

Hi Elena!

I took a deep breath and assembled my guts to send a non-anonymous request 😂.

It’s the classic trope of being James’s controversially younger GF. She has a secret insta account so she occasionally checks the comments. And many people criticize her for being a gold digger and using James to get famous (despite she got no official social media accounts and doesn’t do events, unless she’s there with James). But she’s mostly saddened because they criticize him and call him a pervert for being with a much younger woman. So she decides to break up with him for his sake and public image, but never tells him it was because of cyber bullying.

And maybe a few weeks after the break up, one of other band members shows him the comments and some fans are celebrating that they broke up. And he realizes the true reason for the break up? And in the end, they reconcile and maybe he makes a statement asking everyone to respect his personal life?

I’m a big fan your blog, so hopefully you’ll like the request sgd will consider writing a story 😊. No pressure though))

𝐀𝐓𝐓𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 ²⁰²³

Just all attention that I never wanted, and people obviously stared, judged, and picked apart everything that I was doing, making me super exposed in the most unimaginable way. But yeah, that is a given when you're dating somebody like James Hetfield. Perhaps his name fills up stadiums and blows up newsfeeds.

So looking back, I didn't know what lay ahead as I met him. It was obviously just me and him at first, laughing at little stuff and having a good time over music and life. It was like finally, here's someone who understands me in a way nobody ever has. But man, it all flipped once we went public.

It just seemed like, overnight, it wasn't just us anymore. I never thought it would blow up this bad. People thought I was in it for all the wrong reasons, that I was a gold digger trying to leech off of his fame. But to be honest, the worst of it all wasn't even what they said about me, it was the stuff they said about him.

"He's a pervert."

"How could he be with someone so young?

"They look ridiculous together."

All that that was commented on, I could have completely avoided. I didn't have any social media other than this private Instagram for my use. Yet, honestly, I'd be lying if I said that I never went onto it. I would scroll through and read the comments of some random fan posting in search of some sort of acceptance. But of course, it was just the same brutal tale, the fans tore into James, calling him a creep for even dating anyone of my age.

Man, that hurt. It was not about me, the rumors and all the whispering around, I could handle it. It just was for him, you know? He was a legend, he'd given so much to the world with his music. And now, it felt like people were just using me to take shots at his legacy.

He had totally missed those comments. James wasn't the type to spend too much time online. The real world was sufficient for him.

He had been so nice to me, really supportive, and utterly clueless about all the hate coming our way. He was of the opinion that what we had was strong and would get us through anything. I wanted that to be true, too. Yet, with every post claiming him a creep, or that he's lost all his dignity, I was just simply ruining his reputation.

I liked him so much, and because of that, I made the toughest decision: I broke up with him.

I didn't tell him what it really was for. I just told him I needed space. Of course, he didn't get it. How could he? Everything was all right; there wasn't a fight or at least any huge issue.

I could definitely see the confusion and pain in his eyes as I walked out that day. It really got to me, but I kept telling myself, it's all for his good. He would be much better off in the long run rather than having me holding him back in front of his fans.

The weeks that succeeded seemed to be like a vacuum. I missed him more than I had ever thought I would: how he hummed a tune of some old song while cooking or how he stared at me as though nobody existed in a room full of people. I never changed my mind but kept my distance and followed his movements through whispers of mutual friends, sometimes in the news and other media.

So, one day, this was the fan post I came across from my secret Instagram feed: an appreciation post due to our breakup, saying, "Finally, James can move on and find someone better." Plenty of those comments, cheering on the end of us and acting like they knew what was good for him. Well to be frank, part of me was relieved; I did make the right choice.

But another part of me kinda felt gross, I guess. These people didn't know him like I did. They didn't see the dude behind the music, the one that'd hug me tight after a long day and make everything feel okay.

A few weeks passed, then finally I heard from James himself, by that time I had thought he'd moved on, found his peace in the break up. One of the band members showed him the comments, Lars, if I can recall. I didn't expect that. I thought all the poisonous words of the fans would never find their way to him, that he would never have to see just how cruel people could be. But Lars showed him, and suddenly everything came back.

I got his call pretty soon afterwards. His voice sounded just like it was then, chilled yet serious, in a continuous effort to sort out something big.

He asks, "Why didn't you just tell me.?"

Well, I played the role of clueless well, like I didn't know what he was talking about, but James really wasn't buying that. He got it, saw comments, accusations, those low remarks, judgments, and thus put them together. He knew why I had bailed.

"I thought it was best that way," I finally managed to respond.

"For who?" he asked in a voice that was slightly hoarse.

"For you," I said; my voice was all choked up. "I didn't want people constantly putting you down because of me."

There was nothing but silence on the other side of the line for a long period of time. Then he spoke again, "I don't care what they say, you know?"

All I wanted was to just have the ability to trust him, but I knew words cut, even when people act like it did not hurt. I knew how committed he was with his legacy, how the fans looked up to him. I just did not want to be that to ruin it.

"I care," I said softly. "I just can't handle them ripping you to shreds because of me."

After some time, the reply came in the form of James's soft, subdued voice, "I want you, not them."

This well of my tears, you know the ones that almost spill but hold back. He was too good, you know. He was so understanding, and all the time. Yet, I did not know whether this could mend that which already was messed up.

Days later, James gave a statement to the public. He did not name anybody, but it was like you could read between the lines. He was asking for respect, not just for himself but for the people surrounding him, he owed no one explanation for whom he chose to love, this is his own thing. And honestly, if people are not able to handle it, then maybe they were never true fans to begin with.

The weight of his words was much heavier than what I could ever have imagined. Just words, but powerful words,he was defending me, defending us, in a manner I couldn't even have imagined, and it suddenly felt like this cross of public opinion wasn't weighing on me as much as I thought it had been.

After that statement, James called me up again, and this time I didn't give it a second thought. We met, and the very moment I saw him, everything fell in place once again, the stress, the distance, just gone in his arms.

"I never wanted to hurt you," I said, my voice all shaky.

"You didn't," he said, reaching and pulling me close. "I only wish you had told me sooner."

Of course, people judge and whisper behind our backs, but honestly, that doesn't weigh me down like it used to, since now I have James with me, and I know what we have is tougher than anything those random people can say.

This time I am definitely hanging on.

[allamericansbitch]

Genuine question. What do you think about all of the political pundits and news anchors and other celebrities praising Taylor for the endorsement? They’re all saying she made such an eloquent statement but it wasn’t that good…?

I feel like both 'sides' of this are missing the point because it's the internet and all nuance is lost. Taylor finally endorsed Kamala and took an actual political stance for the first time in 4 years, and that's great. That act is gonna do wonders for the election and really helped move eyes and ears toward Kamala, Tim, and their campaign. There's no doubt it'll make a huge impact. So the reporters who are saying she made an 'eloquent statement' are correct, she did. So people who are looking to hate on that have no reason to hate on that aspect. She did a good thing by endorsing Kamala.

However, that's not what the issue was that people were talking about for years prior that hit a peak a few days ago- it's a part but not the whole picture. Her statement about the election missed the big picture, it never once condemned what people have seen her tolerate personally. Taylor, for the past 3-4 years has repeatedly surrounded herself with close-minded, ignorant, and actively bigoted people. From the people she's voluntarily chosen to work with (i.e David O Russell; a known abuser) to people she chooses to publicly be friends with (Brittany Mahomes, Lena Dunham, Zoe Kravitz, etc) and even repeatedly defended dating vocal bigot Matty Healy. She has repeatedly surrounded herself with people who actively go against everything she says she believes, and actions speak louder than words. How can you say you're an ally to the LGBTQ+ community and publicly be besties and lend your spotlight to someone who doesn't believe trans women are women and shouldn't be in women's sports (Brittany Mahomes). How can you support victims of SA/DV when you're friends/work with abuse apologists and actual abusers? How can you be an ally towards POC when you defended dating a man who publicly said he gets off to porn of black women getting beaten, or while you wear jerseys and support your current partner's team- a team that has made a mockery of Indigenous people who have repeatedly begged for them to stop? How can you be an ally for women when you haven't spoken up for Palestine, where women are being treated in unimaginable ways due to the ongoing genocide. That's the issue, her actions vs. her words.

She can say she believes in these subjects, and that's good it's better than nothing, but we all know the words are pretty empty and for show. A show is good but it always ends and you're left with nothing afterwards. She probably won't say much else about the election because in her mind she did her duty, and that to her is the bare minimum. Half-baked activism is applauded because we are so used to getting nothing. Endorse a candidate and go back to being friends with people who don't see certain groups as human beings. Tell people to vote but don't condemn their hatred, because then you'd also be condemning some of your friends. Enable that behavior and live in that privilege, it'll work out for her and that's what matters the most.

[mightyflamethrower]

They wanted to know how many people would comply with a complete re-ordering of their lives based on no science at all, just random orders, some of which bordered on absurdity.

I have long said that Covid 19 was launched by design by a small number of people in the globalist predator class for one reason and one reason only — as a beta test for the coming technocratic new world order.

Now, we’ve got the World Economic Forum coming out and all but admitting that was exactly why the Covid-19 “pandemic” had to happen.

The WEF gleefully posted the following snippet to the “My Carbon” page of its website where they make a pitch for so-called smart cities, which is just another term for 15-minute cities.

The first of three “developments” that the WEF says must be in place before the world can evolve into its utopian vision of “smart and sustainable cities,” is compliance with restrictions on our freedom. It writes:

1. COVID-19 was the test of social responsibility – A huge number of unimaginable restrictions for public health were adopted by billions of citizens across the world. There were numerous examples globally of maintaining social distancing, wearing masks, mass vaccinations and acceptance of contact-tracing applications for public health, which demonstrated the core of individual social responsibility.

They were testing us. That’s what Covid was all about. They wanted to see how many of us would give up our individual freedom and individual sovereignty by complying with a “new normal” that consisted of restrictions bordering on the absurd.

Why, for instance was it “safe” to shop at Lowe’s or Home Depot but unsafe to shop at a small business or attend church? Why was it OK to go to strip clubs in Michigan but you couldn’t buy seeds for a garden?

What the WEF is implying with its above statement is that in order to be “sustainable,” people and societies will need to be compliant with a new more authoritarian global order. Don’t ask questions. Don’t resort to logic. Just obey.

Would we be obedient in the face of idiotic new laws and regulations, like wearing face diapers to stop what was said to be an aerosolized virus, and standing six feet apart in public, and submitting to a never-before-used, unlicensed mRNA gene-based injection?

They said it was good for you, so roll up your sleeve. Don’t ask questions. If you did, you could lose your job and be treated as a societal outcast. Many people lost friends or even close family members to this monstrous “test” of our willingness to unquestioningly do what we’re told.

Nearly five years later, arguably the most powerful nonprofit public-private partnership in the world, the WEF, admits it was all a test of our wills and celebrates the fact that most of us failed the test (or passed with flying colors depending how you look at it).

They wanted to find out how many of us would prove our servitude to the lawless, fascistic beast system by complying with “unimaginable restrictions,” many of which were created out of thin air with absolutely no scientific evidence to back them up as contributing anything to public health.

The U.S. government’s top health bureaucrat, Dr. Anthony Fauci, admitted recently that there was no science behind his decision to require Americans to socially distance six feet apart.

The beta test known as Covid-19 proved once again the validity of the The Milgram Experiment. This experiment was conducted in 1961-1962 by Yale University professor Stanley Milgram.

It showed that the overwhelming majority of Americans would obey a law or command that they knew was wrong if the order were to come from an official authority figure. An alarming 65 percent of Americans would reluctantly violate their own conscience and obey the order even if they knew it would result in the death of an innocent person.

Trending: Here’s the Real Reason Why Hunter Biden Shocked the Courtroom and Pleaded Guilty in Federal Tax Evasion Case

From Wikipedia:

Beginning on August 7, 1961, a series of social psychology experiments were conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram, who intended to measure the willingness of study participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. Participants were led to believe that they were assisting an unrelated experiment, in which they had to administer electric shocks to a “learner.” These fake electric shocks gradually increased to levels that would have been fatal had they been real.

The experiments found, unexpectedly, that a very high proportion of subjects would fully obey the instructions, with every participant going up to 300 volts, and 65% going up to the full 450 volts. Milgram first described his research in a 1963 article in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology[1].

The Bad News is that we passed the test with flying colors.

[workersolidarity]

🇮🇱⚔️🇵🇸 ☠️ 🚨 OXFAM: ISRAEL'S GENOCIDAL WAR IN GAZA THE DEADLIEST OF THE 21ST CENTURY

International humanitarian organization, Oxfam, released a statement Friday stating that Israel's genocidal war on the Palestinian population of the Gaza Strip is the deadliest war of the 21st century.

The Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) are killing Palestinians at an average rate of 250 civilians per day, which "massively exceeds" the average daily death toll of any major conflict of the century, according to Oxfam.

“The scale and atrocities that Israel is visiting upon Gaza are truly shocking. For 100 days the people of Gaza have endured a living hell. Nowhere is safe and the entire population is at risk of famine," Oxfam's Middle East Director Sally Abi Khalil is quoted as saying.

“It is unimaginable that the international community is watching the deadliest rate of conflict of the 21st century unfold, while continuously blocking calls for a ceasefire," the Director added.

Using nothing more than publicly available data, Oxfam extrapolated that the average daily death toll in the war on the Gaza Strip is far higher than any other significant war of our time, including Syria (96.5 deaths per day), Sudan (51.6 deaths), Iraq (50.8 deaths), Ukraine (43.9 deaths), Afghanistan (23.8 deaths), and Yemen (15.8 deaths per day).

Oxfam points to how the Palestinian population of Gaza is being forced into ever-shrinking areas of the enclave by Israeli bombing raids, forced to flee from areas the occupation has previously told civilians was safe, however nowhere in Gaza is truly safe at this time.

More than one million Palestinians, more than half the population of Gaza, have been forced to seek shelter in Rafah, near the border with Egypt, with massive overcrowding and little in the way of food, water, fuel, or sanitation services, and few medicines left in the enclave's medical centers. Currently, Oxfam says, only 10% of weekly food aid is arriving in Gaza due to the occupation' siege, restrictions and violence.

Oxfam is also warning of the huge threat to life in the Gaza Strip as a result of hunger and disease, with colder weather making the situation even more critical as a shortage of blankets and no fuel for heaters or hot water.

According to the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees (PARC), a partner organization of Oxfam, the situation for Palestinian civilians sheltering in tents has become “worse than anything you could imagine”, with makeshift shelters letting in rain, being blown away in the wind and people resorting to desperate measures like selling precious food or water supplies in order to get a blanket."

Previously, in the Jabalia Refugee Camp located in the north of Gaza was heavily flooded with sewage after Israeli warplanes targeted pipelines and pumping stations in the camp.

Oxfam emphasizes the lack of clean water and proper sanitation, increasing the risk to life in the Gaza Strip, and points to cases of diarrhea, which have risen to 40 times higher than the previous year's number of cases.

“While the mass atrocities continue, lives continue to be lost and critical supplies cannot get in," Khalil, Oxfam's Director says, "Israel’s total blockade of the Gaza Strip is restricting life-saving aid, including food, medical supplies and water and sanitation facilities."

“On top of the already horrific death toll, many more people could die from hunger, preventable diseases, diarrhoea and cold. The situation is particularly worrying for children, pregnant women and those with existing medical conditions," Khalil added.

“The only way to stop the bloodshed and prevent many more lives being lost is for an immediate ceasefire, for hostages to be released and for crucial aid supplies to be allowed in.”

Oxfam ends its statement by pointing to the Genocide hearings at the International Court of Justice, which began yesterday to look into charges that Israel is committing genocide in the Gaza Strip, and said it supports "all efforts to investigate and address all mass atrocity crimes and human rights violations, irrespective of the perpetrator."

#source

@WorkerSolidarityNews

[p-h03n1-x]

Yibo Official Weibo update 6.13.2024, reposting the post Yuehua Entertainment.

This was prompted when they saw a pedestrian, or maybe a sasaeng walking along the tracks

Joint Statement

Regarding the private and non-public racing practice held at the Zhuhai International Circuit from June 12 to June 13, 2024, due to illegal entry of unrelated personnel into the restricted area to watch, the car caused damage to the driver and onlookers when the car was driven on the track. There is a huge safety hazard, so we make the following statement:

The racing car performs driving practice on the track at extremely high speeds. Due to the closed nature of the track, the drivers assume that there are no passers-by or pedestrians on the track. It is relatively safe, so they can concentrate on the practice. However, if some onlookers ignore themselves, Safety, crossing the closed cordon, or even entering the track, the possible consequences are unimaginable.

We hereby make a disclaimer. We will not be held responsible for any personal injury or property damage caused by any onlookers who cross the warning line without permission or violate regulations or approach the edge of the track, and we will call the police. Handling, due to illegal and dangerous behaviors such as onlookers crossing the warning line or approaching the edge of the track without permission, we will reserve the right to pursue accidental injuries and damages to the driver or the car itself.

We hereby solemnly remind you that racing itself is a dangerous sport, including but not limited to risks caused by high-speed driving, vehicle loss of control, collisions and other reasons. Please onlookers fully understand and recognize the dangers of racing At the same time, we also reject and strongly condemn any form of illegal entry into the parking lot for improper filming and dissemination!

[taylortruther]

in a way gaylor is really effective in showing how big and varied the gay community - or in this case specifically the wlw community - can be lol. I feel like the aspect of gender presentation often gets overlooked, when from what i have seen, it can play a part in how eager people are to accept taylor as a lesbian icon (which is seperate to saying she is gay, to be transparent). These are generalizing statements of course and (because the community is big and diverse!) are not Static and True, but in my experience, women to whom "not performing femininity in a way society favors" is a huge part both of identity and life experience are less likely to accept Taylor as a lesbian icon. Which makes sense: Taylor is stereotypically feminine to a t (which imo is only heightened by her very unimaginative way to play with gender e.g. in The Man video), and in a time of "this is the butchest woman twitter can handle" it can be really annoying to see such a girlie girl heralded as some lesbian icon of our time. Which does not take away from the fact that other gay women really see themselves in Taylor and her music!!!! and of course, gnc women can and do also see themselves in Taylor and her music because what i mentioned is ultimately surface level stuff. It just bugs me when people sometimes frame not understanding gaylorism as either internalized homophobia or an inability to Get The WLW Community, when no experience is universal and when there are many very very understandable reasons to reject Beacon of Heterosexual Femininity Taylor Swift as lesbian rep. (not to mention that many gay women are also part of more punk/alternative spaces and thus are already less likely to engage with taylor's music by default. Taylor's middle of the road politics and the ire people may feel toward her as a result may be part of all of this too. I know many gay people who prefer artists who actually are transgressive and advocate for the queer community in risky ways.)

this is extremely well-said, thank you for sending it! i completely agree that a big appeal (and lack of appeal, for others) of gaylorism is taylor's uber-all-american-femininity

[ukrfeminism]

Killed Women is a campaign organisation and network for bereaved families who have lost daughters, mothers, sisters or other relatives.

Violence against women and girls remains widespread and persistent throughout society, with a woman killed by a man every three days in the UK.

These senseless deaths shatter the lives of the family and friends affected, and leave women and girls feeling unsafe in terms of their wellbeing and safety – and a new campaign is aiming to combat that. 

Eleven bereaved families have come together to launch Killed Women, a campaign organisation and network for bereaved families who have lost daughters, mothers, sisters or other relatives to male violence. 

The network has a range of policy demands that they’re campaigning to change, which includes better education about domestic abuse and coercive control to improve the support and rights of the families left behind.

A statement on the organisation’s website reads: “Many of us have faced not only unimaginable loss but also huge failings from the organisations and systems that were supposed to protect, support or deliver justice – whether that be the courts, the police, social services, the media or any other institutions. We believe we have been let down by a litany of failures from public bodies and negligent inaction from successive governments. We want to make sure what has happened to us never happens to anyone else.”

The organisation adds that they want “as many family members as possible to be part of this campaign group so that our voices are listened to. 

“We want to work with families of different backgrounds and experiences to make sure we have laws and policies that protect, support and ensure justice for all women. We know that racism, prejudice based on disability, financial position or immigration status, can impact the abuse, violence or organisational failures women and families suffer.”

Carole Gould and Julie Devey are two women who’ve been campaigning to change the minimum sentence for domestic homicide since 2020. 

Gould’s 17-year-old daughter Ellie was killed by another sixth-former the day after she ended their relationship in 2019, while Devey’s daughter, Poppy, was murdered by her ex-boyfriend, Joe Atkinson, on 14 December 2018.

Since campaigning, a government review is officially underway and looking at whether a killer outside the home will face a decade more in prison than a murder committed in the home. At present, if a killer uses a weapon found in the home the tariff is 15 years, while one who brings in a weapon will get 25 years.

“When you tell people there is this 10-year disparity in sentencing, everybody is shocked,” Gould told The Guardian. “So let’s see the change. Let’s see these perpetrators properly monitored, let’s stop releasing dangerous perpetrators back into society, let’s stop allowing them to change their names. And let’s recognise that domestic violence and domestic homicide is serious, and it should never be treated as a lesser crime to anything else.”

Killed Women is also calling for public support in the form of a GoFundMe page to power their campaigning, which at the time of writing, has amassed over £5,000.

Donations to the GoFundMe will help families “elevate their voice and build this organisation, to create a legacy of change that ensures justice and protection for women in the future”.

[ntls-24722]

i just realized a good idea as for why Miguel doesn't function like our world, because Miguel has been around long enough and is incredibly intelligent, intelligent enough to figure out that kind of thing - she doesn't make things make sense because she's lazy, she doesn't make things make sense because doing so would eliminate her control over herself

The laws of physics are less a set of guidelines that a universe (a sentient thing now that I develop this world) has to knowingly follow, it's more physical constraints in exchange for self-sustainability. Our universe, for example, after putting all its laws in place, has had no control over anything that happens since the very beginning, where it had the self-autonomy to at least start the Big Bang. Since then, our universe has been a spectator for the unimaginely huge and long experiment that is itself, an experiment in which it no longer can directly control until it ends, where it can do nothing but start it all over again. Sure, our universe still has the power to withdraw or add new laws, but doing so at this point would do unimaginable things to reality, even if it was just for a second.

Miguel knows this, which is why she functions on a big big rulebook of "this works because I say so" statements where she pretty much can do whatever she wants with how loose her own stipulations are, but that comes at the cost that she has to create a rule like that for every possible thing happening, and she doesn't have a rule for every possible thing happening because every possible thing happening has not happened yet

[thosekillerheels]

Dearest SLG-you’re 22 today-that’s fucking bonkers. While Rattlesnakes is my favorite, every song from this era is so unique, and yet they all hang together really well. I often think of this record as ADP’s best friend or older sister. It also calls to mind Choirgirl, because of the group aspect. Tori has a HUGE posse! (All the songs are a posse, really, but SLG and ADP are the ones that are actual characters). As with all of Tori’s covers, I prefer most of Tori’s versions, and it’s mostly true with SLG too. The songs that I love equal for her version and the originals are Strange Little Girl, Rattlesnakes, and Enjoy The Silence. All others, I prefer Tori’s. The urban sunrise of New Age, the strident and adventurous Strange Little Girl, the tender yet slightly melancholy Enjoy The Silence, the kill or be killed rampage of Heart Of Gold (it always makes me think of The Godfather/the mafia), the road trip ode of Rattlesnakes, the many voices and cultural critique of Happiness Is A Warm Gun who was more of the the moment than any of us could have imagined, the ominous dark feminine of Raining Blood, and Real Men’s hard look at every man all came together to make an amazing collection. When you add Tori’s horror film last testament that is ‘97 Bonnie and Clyde, the heartbroken Time, who was the perfect choice for Tori’s performance as David Letterman’s first post-9/11 musical guest, and the eerily spot on massacre (back when school shootings were “new”) of I Don’t Like Mondays, and you have a singular, badass, beautiful record, a statement that was very of the moment, and helps us remember how we felt during that unimaginably difficult time. Our heartbreak and connection in common humanity splintered into paranoia and mistrust of difference that has been festering ever since, and whose viral disguise has metastasized in pain sight since 2016. I will love these girls forever. Happy Birthday, Baby!

[dodecalemma]

i saw your comment on that linguists journey post from prescriptivist to a little prescriptivism as a treat. i’m wondering how people use infinite wrong and how it’s supposed to be used?

Hi! Sorry for the delay.

Infinite is not an amount. It is not a very very big number or a number at all. In fact, I think by nature we often underestimate just how big infinity is. For some perspective I recommend looking into Googology- the study of unimaginably huge numbers and how to describe them. Once you wrap your head around those numbers, once I wrapped my head around those numbers best as I could, I had an even greater appreciation for infinity which was even bigger than all of those. There are not infinite atoms on our planet, in our solar system, not even in our galaxy or any finite bound beyond that.

So, to answer your question, people often make statements like “There are infinitely many _“ when there are just a lot but finitely many. I see this as very different than exaggerating because you can take finite steps, you can add something to the number and get to the bigger number you’re exaggerating to, but unless you start with an infinite set, there is no amount of mathematical operations that can get you to infinity. You can’t say, well there are billion and you said infinity so you exaggerated by this much. You exaggerated by infinity. Also nonsensical statements like “this is infinitely better” or “there is an infinite amount of love” or something. That just doesn’t make any sense. You can’t measure love and so you can’t really conceive of an amount of it and infinity seems like a fun unmeasurable word, but we actually can determine if there’s an infinite amount of something and you’re just using it for fluff to sound important.

Of course I acknowledge that this is a different meaning of infinity than its mathematical definition, one which means ‘very much a lot’, but it’s so sad to me to reduce something so grand and cool and unimaginable but still so useful and important as infinity, and the different sizes of infinity which can be baffling, and use it to mean ‘a lot’.

So there’s my treat of prescriptivism.

[kingofangst]

Jujutsu Kaisen AU miniseries Alternate Shibuya Arc - The "Nobody" Kenjaku Forgot that foils his plans

PREVIEW

"Kyomu-senpai", the robotic calling of his surname earns a sigh out of him. With disdain, he takes out the Mechamaru communicator device that he blatantly ignored for the past 30 minutes, "I have news that Gojo-sensei has been sealed."

"Is that so? He's been sealed? Are you completely sure about this or are you lying to create a diversion like the traitor you are, snake?" Kyomu huffs, his eyes narrowing down at the wooden face puppet designed device. The fact that this student betrayed the Jujutsu Sorcerers, especially to Miwa, is palpable and disappointing.

A melancholic sigh follows afterwards. "Take my statement however you truly want it to be. But I was able to deduce that Mei Mei isn't couldn't be the mole because that would have had her doing the objectives from the inside. Itadori Yuuji couldn't be the mole because he only knew about our world for a few months, and you couldn't the mole because you are the only third-year in Tokyo Jujutsu Tech to not have been suspended and kept close within the school."

"You suspected me of being the mole? How hypocritical and disastrous your mind is. No wonder you died and now became trapped in this device." Kyomu scoffs, crushing the skull of the old woman Ogami, who was a curse user that created the curtain until his arrival, after executing her and the other two. Although the taller and lanky curse user should be dead since he stabbed his ribs, damaged his kneecap, bashed his head on the roof before throwing him off to prevail him ingesting the tiny capsule. Mechamaru was about to reply but was instantly cut off by the third-year.

"Mechamaru, has Tsukumo-san arrived yet?" He asked the robotic cursed device. A robotic hum follows afterwards.

"Hai. She just arrived in Tokyo 5 minutes ago."

"What about Kyoto Jujutsu Tech?" There was a hesitant pause that followed. Kyomu had made sure to contact his mentor to come to Tokyo immediately due to how she was always around the world and not following the rules of the Jujutsu Higher-ups. Thank God she was in Korea and not halfway around the world before the incident began.

"They are about to arrive in 10 minutes to Shibuya station." Mechamaru responds, but there's a shaky and anxious tone in his voice. "Kyomu-senpai, I do not know what you are planning but to involve my school into this mission that is in the territory of Tokyo, especially Miwa-"

"Unlike you who put the entire Jujutsu Society at risk of danger and security," Kyomu callously cuts off, staring down at the device, "I will make sure none of your classmates are harmed, including your girlfriend." The senpai's words made Mechamaru silent, probably reeling over the fact that Miwa is being called his significant other. "Besides, all of my classmates and teachers in my school are about to fight an unimaginable battle. So I need to make sure I can protect them until Yuki arrives. I also need to make sure Itadori-kun doesn't get overtaken by Sukuna, since one of the Special Grade curses has 10 fingers."

Kyomu overlooks the view of Shibuya, his eyes glinting with mischief and intellect. "I have it all planned out and will be turning the tides over in this battle." He watches many of Shibuya's residents and civilians evacuate the district in large numbers.

Good, the casualties will be much lower and this will give that patchwork face curse a huge disadvantage in transfiguring humans.

"What are you doing now?" Mechamaru's monotone voice inquires, as Kyomu steps over the ledge of the Shibuya Sky high-rise.

"Let the games begin," He smiles in sadistic glee, knowing the curses and curse users will lose numbers within the next half an hour. "May the odds be in their favor." He bows, before intentionally falling as he unleashes a mirror to transcend his fall and warp into the main part of Shibuya...

So, what do you guys think? A Shibuya Incident AU where Kenjaku's and the curses' plans foil even with Gojo sealed?

[back-on-my-bullsh-again]

So it does mean something. Even if we pretend “feminine” itself doesn’t mean anything, we could call it “traditionally feminine” and we’d know what people talk about. This could mean being pregnant is feminine, in a traditional sense. So pregnant = feminine. On the other hand, anyone can be “feminine”, not just women. What do you think?

I suppose it's important here to clarify that by education I am a philosopher. My Masters thesis was on epistemic justice and testimony. I also dug into hermeneutical justice. This isn't a flex. I just want to make you aware that you're talking to someone very interested in meaning making, the way people are able to make sense of themselves (to themselves and to others), as well as when and why a person is believed when they make statements about their experience.

What this means is I cannot concede to your first sentence that "it does mean something" because that is a huge oversimplification of my previous response. But I want to ask when you say "we'd know what people talk about" in regard to what you call "traditionally feminine", do we? What does it mean to be traditionally feminine? Who is the we? Who are the people? The reason I ask is because what meaning gets infused into femininity or traditional femininity mean different things to different people. Different groups of people define and shape the feminine in varying, sometimes contradictory ways. Even the way the feminine is shaped within a social group shifts over time, making the feminine of generations past indistinguishable as feminine today and today's feminine alien to our successors.

Let's follow your line that pregnancy could be feminine. This is true that it could be. But it could also equally be masculine based on who you're asking. And since you're asking me. I find pregnancy to be a masculine experience. Here, again, is where my philosophical background is going to come into play. I can recognize that my experience of pregnancy is an unimaginable concept to people. A pregnant man? Men can't get pregnant. Women get pregnant. And because a pregnant man is unimaginable, my experience of pregnancy and my feelings about it being masculinizing are unintelligible to people. Some of my needs during pregnancy were so unintelligible that the only way to make myself believed was to alter some aspects of myself to render myself intelligible. In multiple areas of my life I basically had to detransition. This is perhaps the most feminine thing I did my whole pregnancy: changing something about myself, making myself smaller to be more palatable to those who couldn't handle the extent of my identity. It's not a very feminist version of the feminine, but often one that feminine people fall into because of societal expectations.

Let's now assume that you're right that pregnant = feminine. What if I hadn't shifted some of these aspects of myself to make myself fit into social expectations of femininity? Would I have been any less pregnant? No. Would I have been more acceptable to people if I would have detransitioned completely (taking back my dead name, changing my pronouns back, the works)? Probably. And that was the exact point I was making in my initial ask to @manstrans . I as a pregnant man experienced a harm in a way that I would not have if I were a pregnant woman. Because society assumes pregnant = feminine and feminine = woman I could not, and in many ways still cannot, make my experiences intelligible. I was and still am invisible almost every space accessable to women who are pregnant or who have given birth. My point was that men or masculine people who have been pregnant lack the resources and access to care that is available to most (I will not say all because I do not know all intersections of womanhood) women. This is a case where being a man does not give me the privileges I supposedly got when I transitioned.

That was the whole point of the original ask. If you'd like to keep discussing wherever you're going with your asks, I'm happy to participate in your line of inquiry. But I've got a tiny human I want to engage with more than I want to follow you into some sort of gotcha game.

[diewilderonja]

WEF Finally Tells the Truth About Covid

It Was a 'Test' of Our Obedience to Rapidly Forming New World Order

They wanted to know how many people would comply with a complete re-ordering of their lives based on no science at all, just random orders, some of which bordered on absurdity.

I have long said that Covid 19 was launched by design by a small number of people in the globalist predator class for one reason and one reason only — as a beta test for the coming technocratic new world order.

Now, we’ve got the World Economic Forum coming out and all but admitting that was exactly why the Covid-19 “pandemic” had to happen.

The WEF gleefully posted the following snippet to the “My Carbon” page of its website where they make a pitch for so-called smart cities, which is just another term for 15-minute cities.

The first of three “developments” that the WEF says must be in place before the world can evolve into its utopian vision of “smart and sustainable cities,” is compliance with restrictions on our freedom. It writes:

1. COVID-19 was the test of social responsibility – A huge number of unimaginable restrictions for public health were adopted by billions of citizens across the world. There were numerous examples globally of maintaining social distancing, wearing masks, mass vaccinations and acceptance of contact-tracing applications for public health, which demonstrated the core of individual social responsibility.

They were testing us. That’s what Covid was all about. They wanted to see how many of us would give up our individual freedom and individual sovereignty by complying with a “new normal” that consisted of restrictions bordering on the absurd.

Why, for instance was it “safe” to shop at Lowe’s or Home Depot but unsafe to shop at a small business or attend church? Why was it OK to go to strip clubs in Michigan but you couldn’t buy seeds for a garden?

What the WEF is implying with its above statement is that in order to be “sustainable,” people and societies will need to be compliant with a new more authoritarian global order. Don’t ask questions. Don’t resort to logic. Just obey.

Would we be obedient in the face of idiotic new laws and regulations, like wearing face diapers to stop what was said to be an aerosolized virus, and standing six feet apart in public, and submitting to a never-before-used, unlicensed mRNA gene-based injection?

They said it was good for you, so roll up your sleeve. Don’t ask questions. If you did, you could lose your job and be treated as a societal outcast. Many people lost friends or even close family members to this monstrous “test” of our willingness to unquestioningly do what we’re told.

Nearly five years later, arguably the most powerful nonprofit public-private partnership in the world, the WEF, admits it was all a test of our wills and celebrates the fact that most of us failed the test (or passed with flying colors depending how you look at it).

They wanted to find out how many of us would prove our servitude to the lawless, fascistic beast system by complying with “unimaginable restrictions,” many of which were created out of thin air with absolutely no scientific evidence to back them up as contributing anything to public health.

The U.S. government’s top health bureaucrat, Dr. Anthony Fauci, admitted recently that there was no science behind his decision to require Americans to socially distance six feet apart.

They just wanted to see how many of us would prove our fealty to the “authorities,” people wearing white coats or suits and ties.

The beta test known as Covid-19 proved once again the validity of the The Milgram Experiment. This experiment was conducted in 1961-1962 by Yale University professor Stanley Milgram.

It showed that the overwhelming majority of Americans would obey a law or command that they knew was wrong if the order were to come from an official authority figure. An alarming 65 percent of Americans would reluctantly violate their own conscience and obey the order even if they knew it would result in the death of an innocent person.

From Wikipedia:

Beginning on August 7, 1961, a series of social psychology experiments were conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram, who intended to measure the willingness of study participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. Participants were led to believe that they were assisting an unrelated experiment, in which they had to administer electric shocks to a “learner.” These fake electric shocks gradually increased to levels that would have been fatal had they been real. The experiments found, unexpectedly, that a very high proportion of subjects would fully obey the instructions, with every participant going up to 300 volts, and 65% going up to the full 450 volts. Milgram first described his research in a 1963 article in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology[1].

In case the WEF decides to take down this damning link about Covid being a test of public compliance with medical tyranny, I’m inserting a screenshot of it below.

x

[digitalxonixblogs]

“Transforming Financial Analysis: The Impact of Natural Language Processing on Finance and Investment”

Over the last few years, AI has been actively and seriously affecting many industries, including finance. In particular, one of the so-called sub-branches of AI, namely NLP, became a really disruptive technology in financial research, investment banking, and wealth management, generally speaking, in finance. This technology is incomparable when dealing with the analysis of huge volumes of unstructured data, like news articles, financial reports, and even social network posts, allowing financial professionals to work in ways unimaginable in the past.

Introduction to Natural Language Processing

NLP is an abbreviation for Natural Language Processing, which-branch of AI aimed at enabling computers to understand, interpret, and generate human languages. Therefore, computational linguistics integrated into machine learning enables NLP to have the ability to let computers process and analyze large loads of unstructured textual data. Technology is very important in financial research because big texts are studied, which form a vital part of market trends and investment decisions.

NLP in Financial Research

AI in financial research has flipped how data is analyzed. Conventionally, financial analysts have to lean much on numerical data and manual processes, with a host of informed decisions at hand. However, with the coming of NLP, the doors of financial research opened to qualitative data sources. NLP algorithms sift through millions of news articles, financial statements, earnings calls, and even social media posts in search of trends, sentiments, and emerging risks.

NLP, for example, could review sentiment in news articles covering a company to determine possible trend-based movements in its stock. Because this form of data is non-structured, analysts can do more with the processing of this kind of data through AI in finance, receiving meaningful insights and therefore reducing the time involved in research, alongside improving the quality of predictions.

AI in Investment Banking

With the integration of NLP, investment banking also underwent several major steps. In a field where information is power, the ability to read quickly and accurately vast amounts of data becomes important. Due diligence, risk estimation, or market trend prediction is done with the help of AI tools driven by NLP. For instance, it may analyze M&A news and financial disclosures to calculate the potential impact on stock prices and market sentiment.

Besides, AI investment banking has smoothed the drafting process of documents and reports on finances. The algorithms of NLP can summarize and emphasize key information from really long documents. This saves bankers precious time because now they can focus on making tactical decisions.

NLP for Improved Wealth Management

The other important fields of application are in wealth management, wherein communication with clients is the very underlying tool for providing personalized services, and NLP AI should make sense of the client’s interaction to draw out information on customer needs, concerns, and goals of their finances. Also, due to an understanding of subtlety in clients’ languages, understanding, and observations, the wealth manager can give more tailored advice and services.

NLP will also allow market condition analysis to predict the performance of the investment portfolio. In this regard, AI in wealth management processes financial news, economic reports, and other relevant data to make more accurate forecasts that are helpful to the client in making better investment decisions.

The Future of NLP in Finance

As financial markets continue to grow in complexity, and volumes of unstructured data grow, the ability to analyze it more quickly and accurately than the competition will be crucial. AI-driven NLP in finance would provide unparalleled insights previously out of reach for financial professionals and thus assure better and more informed decisions.

Conclusion The Inclusion of Natural Language Processing in financial research, investment banking, and wealth management has changed the face of how interpretations of financial data are made. Since AI technology is constantly developing and growing, the influence of NLP on the financial industry will also keep on expanding, opening more doors for innovation and growth.

[trendybanglaupdate]

Best Facing Risk Statements To Embrace Fearless Decisions

Facing risk ঝুঁকি সম্পর্কে উক্তি is certainly not a simple accomplishment. However frequently the only one empowers us to find our actual potential and accomplish unimaginable outcomes.

Thus, prepare to set out on an excursion of vulnerability and wandering past your usual range of familiarity with my perfect assortment of facing risk statements.

I gathered these shrewd words from different web-based sources to assist you with embracing the adventure of hazard making and stride strikingly into unfamiliar waters.

Best Facing Challenge Statements

"To have faith in yourself is to gamble with yourself, and there won't ever be the point at which that chance is excessively hazardous." ― Craig D. Lounsbrough

"In the event that you are not able to risk the uncommon, you should agree to the standard." — Jim Rohn

"At the point when you face challenges you discover that there will be times when you succeed and there will be times when you come up short, and both are similarly significant." ― Ellen DeGeneres

"To carry on with an existence of greatness, you should face challenges." — Debbie Portage

"Just the people who will risk going excessively far might potentially figure out how far one can go." — T. S. Eliot

"It is by all accounts a law of nature, resolute and inflexible, that the people who won't risk can't win." — John Paul Jones

"The greatest gamble an individual can take is to sit idle." — Robert Kiyosaki

"Risk it, take the plunge. Life generally allows you another opportunity, another go at it. It's vital to face huge challenges." ― Mary Quant

"Face a quantifiable challenge throughout everyday life. Make life an undertaking." ― Rupal Asodaria

"You need to face challenges. We will possibly comprehend the supernatural occurrence of life completely when we permit the startling to occur." ― Paulo Coelho

Moving Statements About Facing Challenges

"No man is deserving at least some respect who isn't prepared consistently to gamble with his prosperity, to take a chance with his body, to put his life in danger in an extraordinary reason." — Theodore Roosevelt

"Risk is the novel way to progress." ― Adria J. Cimino

"I don't have faith in traps. I have faith in facing challenges and not doing likewise two times." — Fellow Laliberte

"You need to risk tumbling to have the option to fly." ― Debasish Mridha

"Opportunity is constantly connected with risk-taking, whether it prompts it or comes from it." ― Nassim Nicholas Taleb

"In the event that there is no gamble, there is no prize." ― Christy Raedeke

"You can gauge a potential open door with the very measuring stick that actions the gamble in question. They go together." — Baron Songbird

"You can't find true success in business without facing challenges. It's actually that straightforward." — Adena Friedman

"Try not to stress over disappointments, stress over the possibilities you miss when you don't for a moment even attempt." — Jack Canfield

"Dangers might make you win, or they will make you learn. Both of the advantages merits trying for." ― Israelmore Ayivor

"As we risk ourselves, we develop. Each new experience is a gamble." — Fran Watson

"At the point when you play it excessively protected, you're facing the greatest challenge of your life. Time is the main abundance we're given." — Barbara Sher

"One default thing of accomplishment is risk, the individuals who face the challenge will get the dish." ― Aabas Sadkani

"In the event that you decide on a protected life, you won't ever understand what it resembles to win." ― Richard Branson

"I can't guarantee that you'll at absolutely no point ever get injured in the future, however I can guarantee you the gamble is worth the effort." ― Rick Riordan

"Most things worth doing accompany their reasonable part of dangers." ― Kirsten Beyer

"The best way to find genuine bliss is to gamble with being totally cut open." — Hurl Palahniuk

"The main thing you lose in facing challenge is dread." — Marion Bekoe

"You must gamble with everything. That is the stuff to be aware, to feel love." — Jessica Mauboy

"Everyone falls flat, it's not a problem. It being human is. Try not to let that prevent you from facing challenges." — Katty Kay

"Risk prompts significance." — Tim Sullivan

"Living in danger is leaping off the precipice and building your wings on the way down." ― Beam Bradbury

"I'm enamored with affection, so I'm continuously facing challenges! I believe it's essential for affection, facing challenges." — Melanie Laurent

"A great many people can do exceptional things on the off chance that they have the certainty or face the challenges. However the vast majority." ― Phillip Adams

"I believe there's no story worth passing on for, however I really do think there are stories worth facing challenges for." — Anthony Shadid

"I really do accept we should take a chance to dream, then, at that point, hazard to plan, and afterward hazard to act." ― David DeNotaris

"There is an alluring thing about facing challenges." — Sonny Mehta

"Incredible deeds are typically fashioned at extraordinary dangers." ― Herodotus

"I have consistently trusted in rethinking myself and facing challenges." — Himesh Reshammiya

"Never let the chances hold you back from doing what you know in your heart you were intended to do." — H. Jackson Brown, Jr.

Empowering Facing Challenge Statements

"Make sure to make a major stride. You can't cross a gorge in two little leaps." — David Lloyd George

"Living with dread prevents us from facing challenges, and in the event that you don't go out on the branch, you're never going to get the best natural product." — Sarah Area

"On the off chance that you don't dare anything, when the day is finished, nothing is everything you will have acquired." ― Neil Gaiman

"Never let the chances hold you back from doing what you know in your heart you were intended to do." — H. Jackson Brown, Jr.

"Anything that you can do or dream you can start it. Strength has virtuoso, power, and enchantment in it." — Goethe

"Perhaps at times facing a challenge is more dangerous not. Now and again all you're ensuring is that things will remain something similar." ― Danny Wallace

"Do one thing each day that panics you." — Eleanor Roosevelt

"Just the people who play win. Just the individuals who chance win. History favors daring people. Fails to remember the bashful. All the other things is editorial." ― Iveta Cherneva

"All that you've at any point needed is on the opposite side of dread." — George Addair

"Risk more than others naturally suspect is protected. Dream more than others suspect is reasonable." ― Howard Schultz

Life Statements About Dangers

"Life is intrinsically dangerous. There is just a single huge gamble you ought to stay away from no matter what, and that is the gamble of sitting idle." — Denis Waitley

"He who isn't adequately valiant to face challenges will not achieve anything throughout everyday life." — Muhammad Ali

"To understand what life is worth you need to gamble with it every so often." — Jean-Paul Sartre

"Try not to be too bashful and nauseous about your activities. All life is an examination. The more examinations you make the better." — Ralph Waldo Emerson

"Gain from botches, yours and others. Try not to allow errors to stop risk-taking! Distinguishing and assessing chances is an essential piece of our life." ― Steven Rosenthal

"There is no power of adoration or feeling that doesn't imply the gamble of devastating hurt. It is an obligation to face this challenge, to cherish and feel without guard or hold." — William S. Burroughs

"You can't go anyplace in existence without facing challenges." — Esme Bianco

"Yet, he'd learned some time in the past that a daily existence lived without gambles basically did not merit living. Life compensated mental fortitude, in any event, when that initial step was taken neck-somewhere down in dread." — Tamera Alexander

"Test quick, flop quick, change quick." — Tom Peters

"I have taken part of endangers throughout everyday life, and I accept that life is tied in with facing challenges." — Ayushmann Khurrana