#Smart access

[mtandtgroup]

WEB Deck™ The Smart Access System

WEB Deck is an innovative clip-on modular system which provides a stable and strong working platform for under-decks. It is suitable for a variety of work tasks and can be used by regular tradesmen without safety lines. The system is quickly installed to the underdeck of bridges, viaducts, jetties and oil platforms.

Fast Installation: Only seven days to install and fully encapsulate 300m2 of bridge under-deck.

Safe: fewer hours working at height; rope access is statistically safer than scaffolding.

Low cost: Efficient install leads to lower labour cost and lower total access cost.

Low self-weight: Suitable for weaker structures.

Full containment: The system includes side containment and full encapsulation where necessary.

[scurvyboy]

Im watching Trailer Park boys rn and Stan is so ricky coded what the hell

he really is and i think about it all the time

another one for the occasion:

[maculategiraffe]

what if it was like in that black mirror episode where you all rate each other all the time and people with less than a 3 star rating are scary hobos EXCEPT instead of a rating system it was a self reported mood indicator or brief status update. something like "aced the GREs!! 🤸" or "just heard my dad is in the hospital 😟" that just flashed up quickly whenever you focused your attention on a person? and you could engage with it or not, just like you can currently engage with a mood that a person chooses to indicate with facial expressions and body language and voice tone, but it would inform our interactions with each other?

I think that could be cool. like how you used to be able to indicate to strangers on the street that you were really sad and they should cut you a break by wearing mourning, except more easily updated and personalized and not just for the very specific emotion of recent bereavement. and if you didn't participate then that would also be fine, it would just mean you didn't want anybody to treat you differently because of what was going on with you. and people would be like "is she okay?" and other people would be like "who knows. I've literally never seen her with a status update active." that kind of thing. I think it would be fun

you could also use it in traffic. like if someone aggressively overtakes you and then you end up sitting next to them at the next red light you could change your status update to "Funny how we all end up in the same place in the end :)" and all your friends would be commenting like "jennifer what the fuck are you talking about" except your platonic soulmate who would be like "jennifer stop bullying the road warriors"

[echofades]

Hacks @ SXSW IMDb Portrait Studio & Deadline Studio

[hopethishelpsdotcom]

This multi cat feeder is SO HELPFUL! We adopted a kitten with gastrointestinal issues who required a special food, but our greedy older cat wouldn't stop eating it. Everyone knows kitten food is more calorie dense, so I was getting worried about our kitten starving because our older cat is eating her food, and then worried about our older cat getting ginormous. I bought these feeders on Amazon and it comes with a set of two. The little pad you see my cat standing on is an RFID sensor that connects to a little charm on his collar. The feeder only opens and works for the cat collar it's connected to, so the cats can only open their own respective feeders. But that's not to say they don't try! They definitely just sit and stare at them hoping it'll finally open. Definitely recommend for cat households where food is stolen

multi-cat automatic feeder, automatic cat feeder for 2 cats, RFID cat feeder, PETLIBRO automatic cat feeder, cat feeder with collar sensor, smart cat feeder, separate feeders for multiple cats, pet feeder with tag recognition, cat feeder for food aggression, automatic feeder for cats with special diets, PETLIBRO One RFID, dual cat feeder with app, Pawsense-enabled feeder, monitored cat feeding system, feeder for multiple pets, food-specific cat feeder, cat feeder with individual access, smart feeding for cats, cat feeder with app tracking, tech pet feeder

[shocked-collar]

hey so @/r00uk is a minor and we should all probly stop spreading their art around and should just block them.

[coolmagoloraskblog]

Its- not your fault?? Um. Sorry our thing is most defintely Not comfort, but like, uhh. All well that ends well? And generally it was just really shitty timing.

What we did probably didn't make it any better, either, but uh. Would've happened either way. Certainly not your fault, lor. We're all knowing or something, we are a reliable source.

[moonshynecybin]

marc and gigi following each other on instagram before marc and pecco finally did is so funny… first of all why does old man have an instagram account. and second. did marc really wait until pecco followed him back on purpose or did he see pecco in his notifs and go “oh shit yeah of course. new teammate”

for twenty four hours i got to live in a beautiful world where the follow was not mutual.... that being said pecco pulling the trigger first is SO on brand lmao

[moretheta]

once again begs the question. how. does he know.

like benjamin has spent his entire life preparing for this moment and has the resources of the first prince of an empire, and he still didn't know about the seed urn. this is farrrr from common knowledge. makes me think chrollo too has an inside source....

[jaybin-todd]

Hey Robin do you have games in your phone

No :((( B (a dick) says I’d only ever need a phone to contact him and that comms work just fine >:(

[mishy-mashy]

Just wanna say this: the High-End Hood should've been Shinomori's corpse.

Yes, it's confirmed Hood is some random fighter from the underground, but it just makes more sense if it were Shinomori at the base?? At the least, I think it'd be verrry fascinating

Although it might be a bit cliche, like if Kudo were Bakugo's ancestor, but it'd be a nice piece of trivia. It wouldn't have to be said outright. Like AFO losing Yoichi's hand cuz of All Might.

Endeavor just fights and kills Shinomori, a cute hermit that gave the rest of his life because of OFA, and Bruce's trust in him over said Factor. Even using his turn to build up strength, Shinomori was looking forward to the future too

A parallel of wanting to be the strongest is drawn between Shinomori and Endeavor. Even after death, the duty of OFA haunts even a corpse.

For why it makes sense if Hood were Shinomori;

Shinomori and Hood wear the same kind of pants (Hood's is ripped, but he's a Nomu and corpse, so it makes sense). It even ends just below the knee. A colored version because I don't want to open the anime;

Shinomori's desire to avoid the strongest (AFO) could've been tweaked by Garaki to look for the strongest instead

Hood looking for the strongest person (hero) could even be Shinomori's desire to give OFA to someone strong enough to protect and grow the Factor. As a hero, someone trustworthy

My [OFA Users are High-Ends theory post] for why Shinomori would be a good base for a High-End

AFO didn't know his face, so the High-End could've been named Hood to keep up themes. That AFO didn't know his face, and even now, he has a "hood"; Hood's face isn't visible beyond glowing features at first

Endeavor burned Hood and said to rest. This could've been Shinomori getting his cremation, and that Shinomori could relax (about OFA)

Endeavor said Hood is possibly Endeavor from the past or the future. In the past, Shinomori wanted to grow his strength for the Factor, so technically, Shinomori wanted to be the strongest. The strongest he could be, at least

The fact we know Shinomori underwent an autopsy, and that Garaki works in morgues to harvest corpses

The knowledge that multiple Quirks kills the normal (not-AFO) person is found in Shinomori. Finding this out, this could've been the reason Garaki and AFO specifically use corpses for Nomus. That way, there's no life force to drain, and technically no drawbacks to the wielder

Garaki was alive during Shinomori's time. Considering these panels,

This happens chronologically. AFO knew Bruce only had leftover embers (he could tell the same with All Might), which is why he looks so dismissive of his corpse. He's just wondering where Yoichi could be now.

AFO met Garaki after he killed Bruce. With all his followers and the way AFO is sitting, he's likely in search of Yoichi in Shinomori. But he never sees or meets the wielder. Thus the way he has his head down, as if upset and ignoring the insignificant crowds

That's why, when he finds Banjo, he's smiling. Yoichi is right in front of him again, after 18+ years of nothing.

Garaki was probably alive for all the OFA users. He's already looking middle-aged when he first meets AFO, and his Ability is just longer life. So he looks younger than he actually is anyway.

Since AFO faced all the previous OFA Users (sans Shinomori), AFO had access to their bodies when they died. Meanwhile, Shinomori ends up in the morgue anyway, likely by Banjo.

AFO shredded Yoichi's body apart, so there's no corpse left. He killed Kudo, Bruce, Banjo, En, and Nana; but not Shinomori, who died of old age, or All Might or Midoriya, because they're still alive.

He has access to the corpses of the previous holders he killed himself, and left relatively intact. And Banjo may as well have given him Shinomori's corpse to figure out what killed a relatively-young, healthy man.

With access to those corpses, AFO and Garaki could've preserved the corpses of OFA Users to make High-Ends

(Maybe see this post where I elaborate why OFA users make great bases for High-Ends)

[tamsiblings]

so I've always wondered this in the back of my mind but your reblog recently brought it back to the forefront

this line especially, but also the vibe you get throughout the entire show that Simon is habitually caring for and protecting river since that what he's always done. And I've been wondering: protecting her from what? The show never shows us what Simon Protecting River looked like before he broke her out of the fucked up lab. I have a pretty good idea that it may have been a form of emotional neglect from their parents. They don't notice River's distress in her letters and basically disown Simon when he goes off to save her so maybe they were the type to never listen to their children or believe them when they expressed their needs. Or care more about how their children's behavior made their family appear socially and less about how their children were actually doing. I also wonder if River didn't have a bit of the Gifted Child syndrome going on and their parents treated her more as a prodigy than a daughter. And Simon had to stand up for her and try to get their parents to see her as a girl first and a genius second.

It would have been really cool to see this actually in the show as a flashback or something, but I bet you've thought about it loads and want to hear your take.

warning: this got reallly tangenty and long as i am wont to do oops <3 putting most of it under a cut

warnings for discussion of emotional neglect and a variety of other factors i think could reasonably be labelled as emotional and psychological abuse. emotional neglect on its own is to my understanding a form of emotional abuse, but i think there are other layers here as well.

anyway heyyyy bestie talking about the tams (including the parents tbh, the little we get of this family structure is fascinating to me) (we do actually get more on simon and river's background than anyone else! bc it's so connected to the current story anyway) is my favorite thing as you may have guessed so thank you for sending this.

and YES i have thought about this a lot <3

simon said he "always has" taken care of river and while i think on a literal level this is likely a Slight exaggeration (even if their parents weren't around physically for that whole aspect of taking care of, i think their material needs were always met and they likely had the means for a nanny or some other kind of support) but on an emotional level, i think this is very true.

i think you are 100 percent spot on with the emotional neglect and other unhealthy dynamics. here's some of what we know on that front:

the tam parents could be affectionate and even indulgent when it was easy and suited their own ends. ie. getting the source box for simon and assuring him he's worth it, calling them "you two geniuses" etc. this could be a very sweet moment and in some ways it is, because i truly believe the tams both believe in the worth and specialness of their children...

but their affection is clearly quite conditional. deeply. and, i think, more than anyone involved quite realizes. it's followed up by "that's the deal - dedicated sourcebox - brilliant doctor'. no matter how lightlyheartedly and affectionately it's said, it's clear it's seriously meant - and baby!simon clearly takes it to heart. (note: i've always interpreted this as simon already expressing interested in medicine and his father basically going "fine, but whatever you're doing, you have to be the best at it". i'm sure attorney or corporate ceo also would have sufficed for their image-focused needs, as long as he was successfuly and prestigious enough.)

i should also note that the the dynamic between regan and her children is far more implied because the focus in safe is mostly on gabriel.

a quote from an interview with sean maher: “It was great to learn where Simon came from. We see that his parents are incredibly ostentatious. There were so many expectations and Simon and River felt so much pressure, trying to be what their parents wanted them to be. And we got an idea of what happened to River. The parents sent her away to a school they thought would further her learning. Maybe they were naive in a sense, to think of only bettering her mind and not listening to her as a girl–as their daughter.” (emphasis mine)

notable here (and i love sean maher for noting this because, understandably because river isn't present in the flashbacks in the episode proper, it's not as clear what river's dynamic with their parents is, but certainly inferences can be made) is that both simon and river feel expectations and pressure from their parents, not just simon.

which leads to me wondering about river going to the academy. i think multiple things can be true here at once. i think, as simon says in the pilot, she did genuinely want to go. she was curious and brilliant and bright and not challenged enough in the current education system she found herself in or by her peers. she wanted something rigorous. i think a lot of that probably DID come from her. but i also do wonder if there was a level of their parents always expecting her to challenge herself in this way because, as you mention and i think implied in the quote above, they valued her brilliance and prodigy above her personhood. i also think it's possible (though i'm less sure on this) that river wanting to go to a school where she lives away from her parents and can both live up to their expectations but where she can distance herself from them could indicate something about how she feels. but might be reading too much into things.

there are also elements of controlling behavior that goes hand in hand with both the conditional love and the valuing their children for their intelligence/ability over simply valuing them as their childhood. in the shooting script, the offer simon gets goes through gabriel, and it's not presented as one opportunity or path simon can take. it's The Plan, and there's no room for deviation even when the most dire of circumstances calls for it. (and like, this would never happen because simon does genuinely value medicine and being a doctor, but in an interesting excercise: how would the conversation look if simon decided he didn't want to be a doctor o some other prestigious high paying XYZ? or even that he wanted to pursue a different opportunity he found on his own and is maybe not quite as prestigious in medicine? i don't get the sense it would have gone over that well.) we don't really get a sense of this with river because again, she's less present in the episode - but i think reasonable assumptions can be made.

^ it's a funny story that simon tells kaylee in object in space, about paying the feds off so they wouldn't tell his father about his drunken (and relatively harmless) escapade with his peers after making surgeon, and tbf, a lot of people probably wouldn't want their parents to know that. but in context with the rest of this, it feels very telling that simon did not want his father (or presumably his mother) knowing he acted at all in a way that could be considered undignified or that he got in any degree of trouble (it doesn't even sound like he was arrested, the police just showed up and he didn't want his parents to find out.)

in many ways, it seems clear both simon and river start off as golden children in their parents eyes - they care about them and value their gifts, but more like you would care about a trophy than a child. they care about what river and simon reflect on them. and notably, when river is no longer just the brilliant prodigy-child but vulnerable, in need of protection, and a symbol of inconvenient truth they don't want to face (a number of them, really - the misplaced trust in their government/society/system, the fragility of status and the false sense of security, their own culpability and failures to protect their children) - instead of helping her when she needs them the most, they ignore and abandon her. and when simon can't do the same, he - as the "truthteller" in many family dynamics of this structure often do - becomes some degree of a scapegoat. he faces the truth they are unable or unwilling to see. they turn a blind eye but simon can't, it's not who he is and he loves river too much. and suddenly, when he's not doing and saying and being exactly what they say he should because he's focused on helping river, he's treated like he's causing problems for no reason - like he's the problem. like he's making a big deal over nothing when he tries to show them the letters, when his father says "are you trying to destroy this family?" as though their daughter being kept and tortured against her will and their own refusal to acknowledge it isn't what's actually doing the family-destroying. and while i think simon getting scapegoated/othered/treated as a problem is a rather new development, and don't imagine they were getting constantly berated - in the scene at the end of safe, YMMV, but gabriel seems a little too comfortable quite ufairly berating simon for things that are quite obviously not his fault or for at all disappointing him. i don't think it was always happening - but i don't think this comes out of nowhere.

on the causing problems for no reason (or a reason they dismiss) component; this feels particularly insidious because they should know their son well enough to know simon doesn't do that. he doesn't do things for no reason, he has a highly overly developed sense of responsibility (which comes back into his dynamic with river ofc.) so like... either they do know that and are purposefully ignoring and even twisting it, or they don't know their son nearly as well as they should.

the scapegoating component lends itself to the extremely uncomfortable gaslighting component in safe. in fairness: i think this aspect of the Tams Very Poor Parenting Choices is likely much more situational and less indicative of past behaviors. regardless, it's pretty rough to watch simon point out things that are quite obviously strange (they don't KNOW anyone called d'arbanville) and have his parents treat him like he's paranoid and insane.

this also comes with a certain level of guilt tripping and beratement. i will say it forever: if i had a child and they were arrested, the FIRST thing i do is ask them if they're okay, figure the rest out later. "

and again: some aspects of all this are situational as we get into the river-at-the-academy component, but i think there's a lot that can be read into the tam family dynamic as a whole based on all this.

so on some level - a lot of THAT is why simon says he's always taken care of/protected river - i don't think he necessarily could have entirely saw or named or what their parents were doing for what it was (which i would argue, as you said, was some degree of emotional neglect and emotional abuse, though some of this is implied or inferred - i would argue based on evidence, but just something to keep in mind). but i do think he developed a sense of responsibility over her and a caretaking role as result.

because it's very notable to me that - for instance - in the river tam sessions, river specifically asks for simon. she doesn't say "i want to see my parents" or even "i want to see my family" but "i want to see my brother." and yes, you could argue that this is because that's who the audience who most care about/be familiar with - but with the rest of the context, it feels extremely significant. in the serenity film, she says something similar to what simon says in that shooting script flashback - "you take care of me, simon. you've always taken care of me. my turn" after simon gets shot and right before she goes in to get his bag and fight the reavers. and like, you could argue that she means ever since the academy - but "always" feels much more weighted than that to me.

it's also interesting to me that river doesn't seem to have as much difficulty reconciling with the fact that their parents abandoned them (and a whole host of other stuff, as established, but that's what the show most focuses on.) now, in fairness, river has a LOT going on - psychic and emotional overwhelm, lots of trauma and intrusive memories - both hers and others, etc - so it makes sense that maybe that just wouldn't be on her register regardless. but i also think... well 1) being so in tuned into what others think and feel, even if she might not have been quite able to name it, i do think she's understood longer than simon (maybe since before the academy; i am still curious if that's paret of why she left) how their parents really saw them. so she's had more time to accept and move on from it. 2) there's this other level where river DID have someone protecting her - simon - even if it took a long time to realize what he was protecting her from. while i think it probably looked less intense than it does in the show proper where she is so deeply traumatized, there is no doubt in my mind that if she was ever upset or anything ever went wrong, it was simon she turned to for comfort or help, not her parents. which tbc: <333 i love them. and this is not her fault at all. but simon Did Not Have That. i think he protected her without quite knowing that's what he was doing for a long time... and didn't realize he needed protection too and wasn't getting it.

which makes it difficult to reconcile and move on from, which is why in the moment in safe when river (seemingly talking about gabriel but likely talking about mal) insists "daddy" will come for them - simon totally shuts down. because he knows that's not going to happen, and it hurts a little too much to deal with, but he's still fairly RECENTLY coming to terms with How Their Parents Are - and the fact that he did not have emotional support. so now he doesn't know how to let himself even ADMIT that he also needs care.

final note (god sorry this is sooo long) i will also say that, while i (as a #tam siblings lover) am often very sad/angry/frustrated about simon and river's dynamic with their parents, and that i certainly will never excuse emotional abuse or this kind of parental behavior, that i try and hope to approach the tam parents in any analysis or ficwriting i might do from a very human angle. the range of human complexity is fascinating to me, and i don't think it does the themes of the show justice to act like the tam parents are outright monsters, totally good or totally bad (note: this is so not in the slightest me saying that i think you are doing this. more just thinking out loud about fandom discussions i have seen surrounding this topic.)

this gets at larger discourse both in fandom and in general i think there is a tendency in our society to want either completely villainize or idolize people (and this maybe becomes especially true in complicated relationships like this). when we talk about abuse to any degree and of any kind, people often want to dehumanize and villainize the abuser in such a way that separates themselves from that possibility - "abusers are evil and inhuman and i'm nothing like that so there's no way i could ever cause that kind of harm etc." but in actuality, there is no inherent internal quality that makes someone an abuser - it is a pattern of harmful behavior that people can choose to do and choose not to do. and i don't want to suggest that people who do this are abusive themselves, that's not what i mean - only that i think the mindset comes from a culture that insists on some very black and white thinking. i think it's a very natural human impulse to want to separate ourselves that way, but also maybe gets us away from seeing the bigger picture. and to be clear: i don't mean to suggest that anyone owes an abuser anything, or that simon and river, for example, should have to forgive their parents. that's not true here or in real life. i only mean to say that people are more complicated than being fully good or fully bad, and firefly reflecting this is one of my favorite things about it.

and again, this is complicated with the tam parents because i'm making a lot of (what i feel are supported, but even so) inferences and assumptions here. so whether you want to identify them as emotionally abusive/neglectful etc is a whole can of worms. but regardless, it's clear their behavior and parenting harmed their children. BUT here are where some major caveats come in:

similarly to the way people often do in other contexts, i have seen people want to outright completely villainize the tams and while i understand this impulse, i think it comes from the same place that a lot of well-meant but misguided discussions do. there are those that think they either must have never cared about river in any capacity at all or actively agreed to sell her out to the alliance (a theory i not only don't like or subscribe to but actually feel misses the point of what's going on with the tams and is less interesting even besides). but i think that sets up the tams to look cartoonishly evil in a way that the narrative doesn't support or intend. do i think the tams are good parents? well, no! i think it was easy to look like good parents when things were easy, but even then, there were cracks. (though i don't think everything was always bad - even in abusive situations, that is usually not the case - there are reasons why people love their parents and stay and have a hard time seeing the bad - because things aren't always like that.) i have also seen people insist or write like it's a given that the tams must have also been physically abusive, and while i don't want and would never tell anyone what they can and can't write, by my own reading, i find that unlikely. i think some of that is often coming from a place of people working through their own stuff, which again - never gonna tell anyone not to do that, you do you - but i also think at times it speaks to a societal tendency to assume that the harm isn't bad enough if it isn't physical - but i think we get a good sense of how deeply simon and river are affected even outside of the confirmation of any physical harm from their parents. (note: i do think the tams being willfully ignorant and leaving their daugher to be tortured and experimented on while on some level know that's what happening is a form of physical abuse or neglected, it's just situational and not in the traditional sense.)

but what i think is so important present, and much more interesting in this story, is that the tams are not evil, so to speak, or at least aren't mustache-twirling villains. they're not even entirely bad-intentioned; i believe they do genuinely want good things for their children, even if they have very specific ideas of what it should look like and how it will benefit them. but they have wholeheartedly, implicitly, without any room at all for questioning bought into the system values of the core and the alliance: prestige, status, and privilege treated as worth, family as a hollow projection of prestige, disruption as the ultimate trespass. to me, the story with regard to the tam parents isn't about them not caring or valuing simon and river at all - it's about valuing those things above them, and how their care is warped and shaped by those harmful systematic values.

now, this is rarer, but i have also seen people want to (maybe in response to above?), if not idolize, then absolve the tams of the role they played in river's abuse at the hands of the academy, but that doesn't ring true to me either. i want to be fair where it's due and say yes, there was danger involved (which simon put himself through) in helping river, but the fact is the narrative focuses much more on the tams focusing on what it could cost them on a social level - their status and "good name", prestige, etc. and at the end of the day, when you have children, you have responsibility to them - and the tam parents failed both of their children on that front.

one thing i also thing is so interesting to note is that simon and river are so loyal and value connection so deeply when it's clear that is not what was most instilled in them on a systematic level or taught to them by their parents. in fact, i think you could argue that while some of it was intrinsic to who they are (here's the old nature vs. nurture debate which i think you could argue simon and river are the two biggest representers of on the show), i also think it's a repsonse to this bond they formed specifically BECAUSE of their parents.

[daily-xisuma]

[030] I went to a ballet today and one of the main characters' signature move was to turn into a >

[offthewall1979]

i'm personally offended by the suggestion that the lyrics on Thriller aren't good, or are just kinda superficial. analyze WBSS. the vivid poetry of Human Nature, which is also pretty interesting intellectually if you analyze it that way. Billie Jean? surprisingly compelling, mysterious, and symbolic. most of the lyrics other than those songs aren't necessarily intellectually interesting, but they're PERFECTLY fitting

I mean, people talk about the GENIUS of the beatles saying things like "from ME to YOU" and "thank YOU, girl" in the early days, and that's happening in a subtle way on Thriller too. "Pretty young things, repeat after me!" "So baby be mine - baby you gotta be mine (tell me that you love me!) - and girl I'll give you all I got to give." "Ooh girl let me keep you warm, you are the lady in my life..."

there is always depth to be found in Michael Jackson's art, whether you see it at first glance or not - and his genius was that a lot of the time you DON'T see it. his goal was to reach as many people as possible with his bottom line message of love, peace, and unity.

[generous-dimensions]

found out i got my new not art related job bc my art portfolio and creative skills made me a stand out candidate im going to be riding this high for a while

[emorish-avian]

guys i’m going INSANE i want iggy to be a huge science nerd so BAD it’s UNREAL