#but also fallible just like us humans

[nereidprinc3ss]

Ok but I think you hit on something in “in the dead of night” about how Spencer leans into his mammalian instincts. Imagine him angry and tense after a rough day and needing that and then talking you through the motions of it and why it makes him feel better because of the science and chemicals behind it all

i absolutely love this!! thank you for requesting:)

also experimenting with a new short and sweet format for blurbs/request! feedback is always appreciated<3

wc 800

warnings: fem!reader, very suggestive, d/s dynamics

“I don’t—Spencer—”

Something in your mouth keeps you from finishing the sentence. Namely: your boyfriend’s tongue. You gasp into him as he tugs your jacket off, arching your back against the wall he’s pressed you to so that the fabric can hit the ground with a thick thud.

“Spence, please,” you manage, barely, as his hand cups your jaw and his thumb presses under your chin, encouraging you to angle your head up and make room for his lips. It’s not that you don’t want this—you told him he could be rough with you and you meant it—but you’re slightly overwhelmed by this uncharacteristic display of nearing aggressive passion.

“What, baby?” he breathes, nipping at the sensitive skin of your neck while his hands snake under your shirt. Focused on the feeling of his hand pressed against your waist, you allow your eyes to flutter shut.

“You’re acting… different.”

A pause—his head drops against your shoulder as he reigns himself in.

“Do you want me to stop?”

“No—you don’t need to stop, I just… it might make me feel better if I knew what this was about.”

He sucks in a breath.

“You want to hear about my day?”

The way his fingers trail downward over your skin is so gentle it feels almost dangerous.

“… Yeah.” But you don’t at all sound sure of yourself. A hum from him seems to rattle your skull as he drags his lips up your neck and over your jaw, kissing you with a softness that is almost certainly deceptive.

“You know what, angel? I don’t actually really feel like talking about that right now. Does that tell you—” he bites your lip, and it doesn’t really hurt, but you whine anyway, “what kind of day I had?”

No words are forming for you anymore, so you make do with an airy “mhm.”

The first button at the bottom of your shirt is undone before you even realize he was unbuttoning it.

“Have you ever heard of the ventrolateral ventromedial hypothalamus?” Spencer murmurs, undoing the buttons on your shirt with a practiced expertise that is hard to keep up with—especially when he keeps teasing your lips with his like this. It doesn’t even matter if you’ve heard of that or not; all the information you’ve ever retained is gone from the stores of your brain. If it doesn’t have anything to do with Spencer, it feels deeply unimportant. You shake your head no. “The hypothalamus does a lot. It regulates our appetites, our body temperatures, hormones…”

Why is this so sexy.

“It also has a lot to do with how we express our emotions. And that tiny part of the hypothalamus—the one I just mentioned—it’s where we process two really big feelings.” He undoes the last button, gently pushing your open shirt from your shoulders. “Anger.” Hands creep around your hips, blindly unzipping your skirt. “And arousal.”

Oh!

“In a disregulated brain, that can be a dangerous combination. But,” he tugs the straps of your bra down, “if you understand it, you can use it to your advantage.”

Your breath is bated as you do the work of kicking off your shoes, and he unclasps your bra.

“The human brain is fallible in so many ways. At the end of the day, we’re delicate, and vulnerable, and convoluted—but we’re also pretty simple creatures, motivated by a few basic instincts. Anger and sex are intrinsic to who we are as animals. For most of history, they’ve defined us. And they’re so closely related. Do you follow?”

Your response comes as a gasp when you realize you haven’t been breathing for a long moment now.

“Yes.” Does it matter if you understand? You just want him to touch you.

“Good.” His lowered voice gets even quieter as he continues, brushing hair behind your ear carefully. “You know I would never, ever hurt you, right?”

“I know.”

You don’t remember how all your clothes ended up on the kitchen floor, but they’re certainly not on you anymore as he presses flush against your bare skin.

“I will always take care of you and keep you safe. That being said—sometimes the best thing you can do when you’re having a really big feeling is to follow that basic animal instinct. It’s why sprinting can help when you’re having a panic attack. Your body is in fight or flight and it will relax if you follow the instinct to run.”

Spencer’s fingers slip under the waistband of your underwear.

“I’ve been having some of those really big feelings today. Do you know what’s going to make me feel better?”

You whimper. Fabric slips past your hips and falls to the ground as Spencer begins closing the small distance between your mouths—but not before uttering a word that has your heart racing.

“You.”

[ilynpilled]

what i think has to be understood about george’s love for tragedy is that it isnt really “george wont let us be happy because this is big boy fantasy” or “if you think this has a happy ending you havent been paying attention” (lol). he just seems to have an attachment to human fallibility and the melancholy:

and the whole magic of a sunset and what makes it so “moving” is the fact that the sun was there. he also quotes “despair is the ultimate crime,” and says that despite everything “the important thing is that love, compassion, and empathy with other human beings is still possible. laughter is still possible!” george’s brand of tragedy and melancholy exists to elevate or simply exist along with moments of triumph rather than diminish them, if that makes sense. same with “men’s lives have meaning, not their deaths” and “all men must die, jon snow. but first, we'll live.” the abyss is coming for everybody like we all are looking at the same ending here but one tragedy does not define anybody any more than a triumph does

[messiahzzz]

i have seen several posts around that addressed how discouraging gale from taking the crown of karsus is “keeping him from realizing his true potential.” that tara is merely upset at his choice, instead of being utterly devastated at the loss of her little love. that it’s not a bad ending per se because to get there he didn’t need to sacrifice 7000 innocent souls in the process. gale isn’t continuing the cycle of abuse either, he still appears to love tav and does come back for them to offer them ascension. he wants them to be equal, so it can’t possibly be an unhealthy dynamic, right?

but what of gale himself, his own convictions, values, and everything he holds dear? everything flawed and human that shaped him into the person he is?

player: are you saying you want to ascend? claim godhood?

gale: no, not like that. i don't want to join them. i want to better them. a god's powers, paired with a mortal conscience, a mortal heart.

gale’s motivation for acquiring godhood is that he will able to aid mortals in a way no other god has ever done before. he won’t hide behind pretense nor require blind devotion of his followers. he will understand and be able to empathize. he wholeheartedly believes that he will be different - he will act.

gale: [..] the gods could aid us if they wished, but instead they cower behind ao. so let us act ourselves.

gale believes that by becoming a god he will kill two birds with one stone: aid mortals and acquire enough power to quash any of his insecurities and enemies in the process. that by ridding himself of every perceived flaw he'll finally feel like he will have enough to offer - maybe, just maybe he'll even be content. his flaws are merely holding him back from becoming the best version of himself, and by ridding himself of everything fallible, he will be whole. maybe this is what all of his suffering has led up to. maybe the orb chose him. maybe the reason he had to endure all the pain, isolation, and excruciating loneliness was so that he could realize that he was meant for something even greater. after all, power feeds ambition. and what is more powerful than a god? his convictions were certainly naive, he possesses enough knowledge to know better. don't get me wrong, part of him definitely wants to spite mystra a lil. but his intentions at that time were mostly pure. a reflection of his self-hatred and feelings of inadequacy.

player: this is wrong, gale. that power will corrupt you, even if you can seize it.

gale: it won't, i swear to you. it's merely a tool - a means to an end.

once we meet gale at the party in his new godlike form, it is apparent that even with all the power at his fingertips, he has reached no greater knowledge about himself. his insecurities are still as present as before, he merely is less subtle in his compensation - repeatedly highlighting his grandeur and how dull life on faerun is compared to the wonders of elysium. it is also genuinely crushing to see how little he thinks of himself even now.

gale: i was nothing. a drifting dust mote of a wizard, abandoned by my goddess, my powers lost, my reputation destroyed. and look at me now. i'm their proof.

any perceived dismissal of his Greatness™ is met with immediate disdain.

gale: a bold decision to treat a divine being with such cold indifference.

nodecontext: aloof, annoyed you weren't impressed with him

gale: you mortals do love to live dangerously, don't you?

nodecontext: the slightest hint of a threat - you've probably made an enemy here today. or at least, you've lost a friend.

he is still desperate to impress. emphasizing what an honor it is that a new-born god chose to bless their little soiree with his presence. gaze upon all his divine glory! gale has now become the embodiment of everything he criticized about the gods. his original intentions and plans are discarded and long forgotten. he assuages his erstwhile companions by telling them to simply pray to him, in case they should ever require aid. if they're lucky and their ambition pleases him, he might even deliver.

player: what does the 'god of ambition' offer to his followers?

gale: i 'offer' them nothing. i inspire them to seize their destinies for themselves.

player: interesting, so you help mortals help themselves?

gale: precisely. though that isn't to say i'm averse to the odd bit of direct encouragement.

gale: [..] my aims are set a little higher than offering cursory blessings to just any half-decent spellcaster.

gale: regardless, ethical quandaries are more the remit of my mortal devotees. they do love to talk, and faerun is starting to listen.

aiding "any half-decent spellcaster" is unbefitting of his status. he isn't concerned with questions of ethics and morality either. deeming such matters beneath his divine capabilities.

once gale has ascended and established his domain, what remains of the gale we knew? what of his mortal heart?

minthara: your ambition is not cruel, but you fear that if you indulge it, you will lose yourself in the mysteries of the weave and unravel the world.

minthara: you are afraid of so many things, and it is that fear that keeps you true to yourself.

gale did lose himself and ultimately became one of his biggest fears. considering that his existence as a being of pure ambition leads him to constantly seek out greater heights, it isn't farfetched to believe that raphael's prediction will indeed come true.

player[astarion]: ambition? finally, a god i can get behind...

gale: i assure you, this is merely the prelude to a far grander vision. elysium's in for something of a shake-up.

all that remains of gale is a thin veneer of the person he used to be. what he presents is a hollow echo of the old gale. he does retain some of his mannerisms and quirks, but he is definitely a lot colder and more condescending. if his personality already changed that drastically after a duration of only 6 months, what will he inevitability turn into when he has eternity at his disposal?

essentially, you are aiding gale in the eradication of himself. eradicating everything about him that made him into the loveable, charismatic, awkward, kind, buoyant person he was. everything about him that he perceived as defective, flawed, and lesser-than. before, his hubris was merely an expression of his own discontentment and low self-worth, but now he is hubris incarnate. all of his worst qualities have been amplified.

gale: i am ambition incarnate. as indistinguishable from that most potent sensation as mystra herself is from the weave. and word is spreading.

nodecontext: palpable, almost unsettling excitement from him - hint of megalomania

he put his trust in tav, trusting their judgment and relying on them to nudge him in the right direction. after all, they had plenty of opportunities to show him that they are an ally worth following and confiding in. but in the end, the prospect of what he could be, the things he could give them, the enemies he could yet conquer, won over the desire to simply accept him and help him rebuild a life on solid ground. tav denied him the unconditional love he craves most out of their own selfish desires.

tara: you were looking out for him. i expected better of you.

as i've already mentioned, gale desires nothing more than to be seen, accepted, loved, and valued. having a partner who wholeheartedly supports and believes in him is enough to make him feel content. most importantly - he just wants to live. to enjoy life with everything it has to offer. his ambition can’t be quenched because he hungers still. believing that only by acquiring more power will he finally be enough and reach said acceptance.

we see in his good ending that his own contentment was even able to influence and (temporarily) sate the orb's ever-present hunger:

gale: [..] or perhaps the orb's hunger was fuelled by my own, and my contentment influences it in much the same way.

gale: that's how i feel with you - content. it's a rather unfamiliar feeling, i must say. not something gale of waterdeep ever craved.

it is devastating that he doesn't reach the same feeling of fulfillment if he chooses to pursue godhood, and is instead compelled to continuously surpass his own accomplishments. not being granted rest or reprieve.

gale: i achieved everything we hoped i would, and still i'm not good enough for you?

gale pursuing godhood isn't evidence that he "has been evil all along" or that he "just waited to be unleashed" either. we can't diminish tav's influence in this outcome, they are after all an extension of the player. able to steer every companion toward a path of redemption or to enable them in their worst traits. fandom has already established that by letting astarion ascend you are actively supporting him in becoming the very thing he despises most, putting your own ambitions and idea of what you want him to be above his healing, this is no different.

tara: the gale i knew wasn't like this. he recognised his mistakes. he was contrite. all he wanted to do was live.

tara: unfortunately, he fell into company that turned his gaze towards foolishness. yes, i mean you.

player: gale is his own man, tara.

tara: false. he was mine. though now he belongs only to his own pride.

yes, the epilogue cutscene is beautiful and there is something bittersweet and romantic about his love for tav being one of the few emotions that remained a constant throughout the past 6 months. he didn't need to come back for them, but he did cause he loves them still. no matter how warped his definition of love may be now. while it is abundantly clear that tav ranks lower on his priority list than they did before, his commitment remains.

gale fears isolation, hoping to never return to the time when he was hopeless and alone, stuck inside his tower. by heading in this direction he is once again creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

tara: [..] if i pretended you hadn't turned tail on every lesson you set out to learn, i'd have no right to call myself your friend.

morena may as well have already resigned herself to her son’s death. elminster partly blames himself. for his lapse in judgment, as well as being the one who plucked him from obscurity in the first place. mourning the kind, bright-eyed boy who cried at the scorched roses in his neighbor's garden. tara won't be here anymore to care and look out for him either. he has lost his oldest and dearest friend, the one who witnessed his downfall from grace and never left his side. who believed him to be the finest mind AND the finest wizard she's ever had the pleasure to know. who was certain that he’d find a way out of any crisis no matter the circumstances. ...and if tav declines his offer to ascend with him? what does he have left?

gale: yes, i am rather radiant, aren't i?

tara: don't flatter yourself, gale. you've debased yourself in ways i could never have fathomed.

tara: goodbye gale, i hope the heavens are worth it.

gale’s godhood ending deals with the loss of humanity, the loss of oneself, and everything one holds dear. it is a devastating and bone-chilling narrative. it is a tragedy.

gale: i hope you don't think less of me. great ambition should not come at the expense of what you already hold dear. i see that now.

if gale could see himself, he would be horrified at the losses he deemed necessary to get here. he would be horrified at what he’s become.

[katakaluptastrophy]

Continuing to think about the horror of what happens to John, and the horrors of love...

When Alecto has first been created, she says to him "I picked you to change, and this is how you repay me?" and "What have you done to me?"

They're heartbreaking questions she has every right to ask, but there's something awful and ironic about them too. Because John also might have asked "what have you done to me?"

It's easy to get distracted by the cartoonish awfulness of John's own narration: "talk about police abuse", "come on, love. Guys as careful as me don't have accidents," "love a working tram system." But all of these comments come after moments where John has unwittingly come into proximity with violent death, an experience he repeatedly likens to having drugs forcibly injected into him; an omniscient, dream-like, out of body experience that seems to propel him forward through his basest impulses. The first time this happens, he's brought back from "the verge of something insane" by being shaken violently by P-. Lines like these aren't revealing John's diabolical plotting. They're a man who would rather own atrocities as premeditated than admit that he was losing his grip.

The second is when he encounters the soul of the earth. His human mind makes contact with the incoherent, furious soul of a planet. In any other context, this would be straightforwardly Lovecraftian. And everything he describes after that is full of elipses, jumbled, and detached. His friends are shot by gun-toting cultists and he says it was like a dream.

Hearing the earth screaming, feeling his friends' deaths under his skin like a drug, he might well have asked "what have you done to me?"

Alecto said to him, "I picked you to change, and this is how you repay me?" But as everything collapses, John says:

"I thought you were going to take me, somehow. Purge me. Use me as an instrument. But you didn't say anything...I was babbling, Show me. Come on. I'm ready. You kept screaming and screaming..."

John has spent months becoming something terrifying, an entity with yellow eyes and uncanny powers. He's discovered that death has an overwhelming impact on him that he cannot fully control. Everyone was relying on him to do something. And he did so many things: well-meaning things and stupid things and things that were lashing out in rage and frustration. Hundreds of people have died because of him. His friends have died because of him. Surely, surely there was a point to this. Surely there was meaning. Surely whatever did this to him, made him into this, had a greater plan.

But there is no plan. There is no great revelation. He tries to hurt the earth, to provoke some kind of answer, but the screaming continues. And when P dies, the person who snapped him out of it the last time, John lets go and the whole world dies.

John is kneeling on the grass vomiting up dirt and tearing out his own ribs, saying "there was still too much of me that was just a human being...", trying to swallow the soul of the earth. And by the end, the one shred he has to hold onto is a memory of playing with a doll as a child. That, and his anger...

The earth tried to reach out in the only way it could, amidst its incoherent suffering. And John tried to use the abilities it gave him, but he was only human. Fallible and proud and angry.

She said, "I still love you." And the horror; the horror of love, the horror of this story, is that to begin with they did this to each other.

To be clear: I don't mean to diminish the awfulness or the very specific forms that John's violence against Alecto takes, and continues to take across the story. I don't mean to excuse his own self-mythologisation. I certainly don't think he's blameless for the decisions he made and the agenda he pursued. But if there's one thing that happens over and over again in TLT, it's that the horror of love is not a one-way street.

And I wonder, in light of what we now know about the permeability of the soul, quite where John ends and Alecto begins. And when that blurring began...

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Humans are not perfectly vigilant

I'm on tour with my new, nationally bestselling novel The Bezzle! Catch me in BOSTON with Randall "XKCD" Munroe (Apr 11), then PROVIDENCE (Apr 12), and beyond!

Here's a fun AI story: a security researcher noticed that large companies' AI-authored source-code repeatedly referenced a nonexistent library (an AI "hallucination"), so he created a (defanged) malicious library with that name and uploaded it, and thousands of developers automatically downloaded and incorporated it as they compiled the code:

https://www.theregister.com/2024/03/28/ai_bots_hallucinate_software_packages/

These "hallucinations" are a stubbornly persistent feature of large language models, because these models only give the illusion of understanding; in reality, they are just sophisticated forms of autocomplete, drawing on huge databases to make shrewd (but reliably fallible) guesses about which word comes next:

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3442188.3445922

Guessing the next word without understanding the meaning of the resulting sentence makes unsupervised LLMs unsuitable for high-stakes tasks. The whole AI bubble is based on convincing investors that one or more of the following is true:

There are low-stakes, high-value tasks that will recoup the massive costs of AI training and operation;

There are high-stakes, high-value tasks that can be made cheaper by adding an AI to a human operator;

Adding more training data to an AI will make it stop hallucinating, so that it can take over high-stakes, high-value tasks without a "human in the loop."

These are dubious propositions. There's a universe of low-stakes, low-value tasks – political disinformation, spam, fraud, academic cheating, nonconsensual porn, dialog for video-game NPCs – but none of them seem likely to generate enough revenue for AI companies to justify the billions spent on models, nor the trillions in valuation attributed to AI companies:

https://locusmag.com/2023/12/commentary-cory-doctorow-what-kind-of-bubble-is-ai/

The proposition that increasing training data will decrease hallucinations is hotly contested among AI practitioners. I confess that I don't know enough about AI to evaluate opposing sides' claims, but even if you stipulate that adding lots of human-generated training data will make the software a better guesser, there's a serious problem. All those low-value, low-stakes applications are flooding the internet with botshit. After all, the one thing AI is unarguably very good at is producing bullshit at scale. As the web becomes an anaerobic lagoon for botshit, the quantum of human-generated "content" in any internet core sample is dwindling to homeopathic levels:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/14/inhuman-centipede/#enshittibottification

This means that adding another order of magnitude more training data to AI won't just add massive computational expense – the data will be many orders of magnitude more expensive to acquire, even without factoring in the additional liability arising from new legal theories about scraping:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/17/how-to-think-about-scraping/

That leaves us with "humans in the loop" – the idea that an AI's business model is selling software to businesses that will pair it with human operators who will closely scrutinize the code's guesses. There's a version of this that sounds plausible – the one in which the human operator is in charge, and the AI acts as an eternally vigilant "sanity check" on the human's activities.

For example, my car has a system that notices when I activate my blinker while there's another car in my blind-spot. I'm pretty consistent about checking my blind spot, but I'm also a fallible human and there've been a couple times where the alert saved me from making a potentially dangerous maneuver. As disciplined as I am, I'm also sometimes forgetful about turning off lights, or waking up in time for work, or remembering someone's phone number (or birthday). I like having an automated system that does the robotically perfect trick of never forgetting something important.

There's a name for this in automation circles: a "centaur." I'm the human head, and I've fused with a powerful robot body that supports me, doing things that humans are innately bad at.

That's the good kind of automation, and we all benefit from it. But it only takes a small twist to turn this good automation into a nightmare. I'm speaking here of the reverse-centaur: automation in which the computer is in charge, bossing a human around so it can get its job done. Think of Amazon warehouse workers, who wear haptic bracelets and are continuously observed by AI cameras as autonomous shelves shuttle in front of them and demand that they pick and pack items at a pace that destroys their bodies and drives them mad:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/04/17/revenge-of-the-chickenized-reverse-centaurs/

Automation centaurs are great: they relieve humans of drudgework and let them focus on the creative and satisfying parts of their jobs. That's how AI-assisted coding is pitched: rather than looking up tricky syntax and other tedious programming tasks, an AI "co-pilot" is billed as freeing up its human "pilot" to focus on the creative puzzle-solving that makes coding so satisfying.

But an hallucinating AI is a terrible co-pilot. It's just good enough to get the job done much of the time, but it also sneakily inserts booby-traps that are statistically guaranteed to look as plausible as the good code (that's what a next-word-guessing program does: guesses the statistically most likely word).

This turns AI-"assisted" coders into reverse centaurs. The AI can churn out code at superhuman speed, and you, the human in the loop, must maintain perfect vigilance and attention as you review that code, spotting the cleverly disguised hooks for malicious code that the AI can't be prevented from inserting into its code. As "Lena" writes, "code review [is] difficult relative to writing new code":

https://twitter.com/qntm/status/1773779967521780169

Why is that? "Passively reading someone else's code just doesn't engage my brain in the same way. It's harder to do properly":

https://twitter.com/qntm/status/1773780355708764665

There's a name for this phenomenon: "automation blindness." Humans are just not equipped for eternal vigilance. We get good at spotting patterns that occur frequently – so good that we miss the anomalies. That's why TSA agents are so good at spotting harmless shampoo bottles on X-rays, even as they miss nearly every gun and bomb that a red team smuggles through their checkpoints:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/08/23/automation-blindness/#humans-in-the-loop

"Lena"'s thread points out that this is as true for AI-assisted driving as it is for AI-assisted coding: "self-driving cars replace the experience of driving with the experience of being a driving instructor":

https://twitter.com/qntm/status/1773841546753831283

In other words, they turn you into a reverse-centaur. Whereas my blind-spot double-checking robot allows me to make maneuvers at human speed and points out the things I've missed, a "supervised" self-driving car makes maneuvers at a computer's frantic pace, and demands that its human supervisor tirelessly and perfectly assesses each of those maneuvers. No wonder Cruise's murderous "self-driving" taxis replaced each low-waged driver with 1.5 high-waged technical robot supervisors:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/11/robots-stole-my-jerb/#computer-says-no

AI radiology programs are said to be able to spot cancerous masses that human radiologists miss. A centaur-based AI-assisted radiology program would keep the same number of radiologists in the field, but they would get less done: every time they assessed an X-ray, the AI would give them a second opinion. If the human and the AI disagreed, the human would go back and re-assess the X-ray. We'd get better radiology, at a higher price (the price of the AI software, plus the additional hours the radiologist would work).

But back to making the AI bubble pay off: for AI to pay off, the human in the loop has to reduce the costs of the business buying an AI. No one who invests in an AI company believes that their returns will come from business customers to agree to increase their costs. The AI can't do your job, but the AI salesman can convince your boss to fire you and replace you with an AI anyway – that pitch is the most successful form of AI disinformation in the world.

An AI that "hallucinates" bad advice to fliers can't replace human customer service reps, but airlines are firing reps and replacing them with chatbots:

https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-air-canada-chatbot-misinformation-what-travellers-should-know

An AI that "hallucinates" bad legal advice to New Yorkers can't replace city services, but Mayor Adams still tells New Yorkers to get their legal advice from his chatbots:

https://arstechnica.com/ai/2024/03/nycs-government-chatbot-is-lying-about-city-laws-and-regulations/

The only reason bosses want to buy robots is to fire humans and lower their costs. That's why "AI art" is such a pisser. There are plenty of harmless ways to automate art production with software – everything from a "healing brush" in Photoshop to deepfake tools that let a video-editor alter the eye-lines of all the extras in a scene to shift the focus. A graphic novelist who models a room in The Sims and then moves the camera around to get traceable geometry for different angles is a centaur – they are genuinely offloading some finicky drudgework onto a robot that is perfectly attentive and vigilant.

But the pitch from "AI art" companies is "fire your graphic artists and replace them with botshit." They're pitching a world where the robots get to do all the creative stuff (badly) and humans have to work at robotic pace, with robotic vigilance, in order to catch the mistakes that the robots make at superhuman speed.

Reverse centaurism is brutal. That's not news: Charlie Chaplin documented the problems of reverse centaurs nearly 100 years ago:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Times_(film)

As ever, the problem with a gadget isn't what it does: it's who it does it for and who it does it to. There are plenty of benefits from being a centaur – lots of ways that automation can help workers. But the only path to AI profitability lies in reverse centaurs, automation that turns the human in the loop into the crumple-zone for a robot:

https://estsjournal.org/index.php/ests/article/view/260

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/01/human-in-the-loop/#monkey-in-the-middle

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

--

Jorge Royan (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Munich_-_Two_boys_playing_in_a_park_-_7328.jpg

CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en

--

Noah Wulf (modified) https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Thunderbirds_at_Attention_Next_to_Thunderbird_1_-_Aviation_Nation_2019.jpg

CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en

[deadpresidents]

On the cliffs of Normandy, in a small holding area, the President of the United States was looking out at the English Channel. It was only six weeks ago, on the 80th anniversary of the D-Day landings, and President Biden had just finished his remarks at the American cemetery atop Omaha Beach. Guests had been congratulating him on the speech, but he didn't want to talk about himself. The moment was not about him; it was about the men who had fought and died there. "Today feels so large," he told me. "This may sound strange -- and I don't mean it to -- but when I was out there, I felt the honor of it, the sanctity of it. To speak for the American people, to speak over those graves, it's a profound thing." He turned from the view over the beaches and gestured back toward the war dead. "You want to do right by them, by the country."

Mr. Biden has spent a lifetime trying to do right by the nation, and he did so in the most epic of ways when he chose to end his campaign for re-election. His decision is one of the most remarkable acts of leadership in our history, an act of self-sacrifice that places him in the company of George Washington who also stepped away from the presidency. To put something ahead of one's immediate desires -- to give, rather than to try to take -- is perhaps the most difficult thing for any human being to do. And Mr. Biden has done just that.

To be clear: Mr. Biden is my friend, and it has been a privilege to help him when I can. Not because I am a Democrat -- I belong to neither party and have voted for both Democrats and Republicans -- but because I believe him to be a defender of the Constitution and a public servant of honor and of grace at a time when extreme forces threaten the nation. I do not agree with everything he has done or wanted to do in terms of policy. But I know him to be a good man, a patriot and a president who has met challenges all too similar to those Abraham Lincoln faced. Here is the story I believe history will tell of Joe Biden. With American democracy in an hour of maximum danger in Donald Trump's presidency, Mr. Biden stepped in the breach. He staved off an authoritarian threat at home, rallied the world against autocrats abroad, laid the foundations for decades of prosperity, managed the end of a once-in-a-century pandemic, successfully legislated on vital issues of climate and infrastructure and has conducted a presidency worthy of the greatest of his predecessors. History and fate brought him to the pinnacle in a late season in his life, and in the end, he respected fate -- and he respected the American people.

It is, of course, an incredibly difficult moment. Highs and lows, victories and defeats, joy and pain: It has been ever thus for Mr. Biden. In the distant autumn of 1972, he experienced the most exhilarating of hours -- election to the United States Senate at the age of 29. He was no scion; he earned it. The darkness fell: His wife and daughter were killed in an automobile accident that seriously injured his two sons, Beau and Hunter. But he endured, found purpose in the pain, became deeper, wiser, more empathetic. Through the decades, two presidential campaigns imploded, and in 2015 his son Beau, a lawyer and wonderfully promising young political figure, died of brain cancer after serving in Iraq.

Such tragedy would have broken many lesser men. Mr. Biden, however, never gave up, never gave in, never surrendered the hope that a fallen, frail and fallible world could be made better, stronger and more whole if people could summon just enough goodness and enough courage to build rather than tear down. Character, as the Greeks first taught us, is destiny, and Mr. Biden's character is both a mirror and a maker of his nation's. Like Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan, he is optimistic, resilient and kind, a steward of American greatness, a love of the great game of politics and, at heart, a hopeless romantic about the country that has given him so much.

Nothing bears out this point as well as his decision to let history happen in the 2024 election. Not matter how much people say that this was inevitable after the debate in Atlanta last month, there was nothing foreordained about an American President ending his political career for the sake of his country and his party. By surrendering the possibility of enduring in the seat of ultimate power, Mr. Biden has taught us a landmark lesson in patriotism, humility and wisdom.

Now the question comes to the rest of us. What will we the people do? We face the most significant of choices. Mr. Roosevelt framed the war whose dead Mr. Biden commemorated at Normandy in June as a battle between democracy and dictatorship. It is not too much to say that we, too, have what Mr. Roosevelt called a "rendezvous with destiny" at home and abroad. Mr. Biden has put country above self, the Constitution above personal ambition, the future of democracy above temporal gain. It is up to us to follow his lead.

-- "Joe Biden, My Friend and an American Hero" by Jon Meacham, New York Times, July 22, 2024.

[consistentlycasuallycombusting]

Possibly awful take, but I think a mass appeal of tsh is that Richard is an extremely human narrator and character. He’s fallible, arrogant, insecure, and we see our worst in him. Richard is the complete opposite of the god like status he gives the others, who are still just people too. He brings new meanings to the word humanity, because he exudes it while absolutely sucking at nearly everything. Even with aesthetics, I think that his character is actually one of the main reasons so many like the book. He’s just familiar enough to not get in the way of how so many of us also idolize the others.

[redwolf17]

Hozier and romanticizing Ireland, or why the “bog man” shtick should be dropped back into the bog from whence it came

So after a slapdash, frustrated post about the politics of Hozier's music went batshit yesterday, I wanna do a quick follow up about the whole bog man thing, which multiple people mentioned in the reblogs and tags.

Artists are usually known by their names, either the one they got at birth or the one they picked for their career. Beyoncé Knowles Carter goes by Beyoncé, Stefani Germanotta goes by Lady Gaga, Taylor Swift goes by Taylor Swift, etc.

Andrew Hozier-Byrne goes by the stage name Hozier. When talking about him online, most people just call him Hozier, or sometimes Andrew for emphasis or to be silly. Then you have the people who call him stuff like this:

Yeahhhhhhhh, that's just some of what I found in like a 5 minute search. If you search tumblr for "bog man" or "forest daddy" it's almost all posts about Hozier; there's a lot more (and weirder) if you go look on TikTok.

People from other countries romanticizing Ireland isn't new, but that doesn't make it acceptable. Ireland is very much a modern country with modern problems, despite media (mostly American) which prefers to focus on Ireland as an exotic, idealized land, a postcard from the past where everyone lives in cottages and dresses in green and only speaks in mysterious rhyming couplets. Heck, only 3 in 10 Irish people live in rural areas. The other 7 in 10 live in urban or suburban areas, including Hozier. He lives in County Wicklow, which is quite close to Dublin, a city of over 500,000 people and also Ireland's capital.

Like, I'm not saying anyone is The Devil for making a couple "bog man" cracks. God knows I made a few of them back in 2019; one of my old posts makes me cringe because I joked about Hozier and fairy mounds. And you can find old examples of Hozier humoring the gag here and there, whether because he found it funny at the time or because he was just playing along.

Lately, though? When the bogfather/fae king stuff comes up in interviews, Hozier seems uncomfortable with it, even though he stays polite:

Like. Hozier is just a guy. A dude named Andrew who sings and plays guitar and writes songs and is a fallible human being. Artists can't completely control their image, but if you're a fan of someone's music, you should try to treat them as a person, not a mythical creature or a bundle of stereotypes about their country or a flawless statue to be stuck up on a pedestal.

All of us (including me!) fuck up sometimes. But once we know better, we should choose to do better.

[strqyr]

gods, but this:

OSCAR: um, if you're not sure where to start, i do have a suggestion. if you'd like? JAUNE: sure. OSCAR: think about the good times. what little they might have been that you spent in the ever after. JAUNE: just focus on the positive? OSCAR: no, not like that. it might be able to help you remember what it was all for, and rewrite the story in your own way.

it says so much about oz's view on the fairy tales, especially the ones ozpin chose to include in his collection of them (fairy tales of remnant). it's also kind of similar to lewis; the story he wrote is a story as he wished it had happened.

how much of it focuses on the good times, no matter how few and far between those were? how much of it is to remember what it all has been for (ozma came back for salem, not to redeem humanity in front of the gods; that, he said 'no' to)?

how much of it is him rewriting the story in a way he wished it had happened? in a way that makes it easier to deal with the reality, the situation he has found himself in, not knowing exactly what he had signed up for?

it brings to mind his notes from 'the infinite man', which—at least to me—have a slightly different meaning behind them now than they did before:

This rendition—in which the man indeed is everything he claims to be—is the most romantic and, I think, balanced version of the story, which I have cobbled together from a variety of differing accounts in an effort to paint a larger and clearer picture, one that is slightly more sympathetic to the man. He is alternately portrayed as a hero or a fool—and again I say, why can't it be both? Less commonly, he is represented as the villain. In response, I offer another interpretation for your consideration: Good intentions do not always have good results. We are all fallible. We all make mistakes. And forgiveness of those failures goes hand in hand with trust. Although I have embellished this story slightly—attributing motives to the man's actions based on my own assumptions and, admittedly, my own prejudices and belief that there is good in all of us—no one who wasn't there could know what really happened. And even then, they would only have a small part of the story. Therefore, I leave it to you to decide whether this man is worthy of forgiveness. Truth itself is not an absolute, and everyone is free to make their own choices.

[saintsenara]

❤, 💛, and 💜 please!

thank you very much for the ask, anon!

which character do you think is the most egregiously mischaracterized by the fandom?

having seen the state of my inbox, this isn't the only time this one will come up...

so let's start strong by going for... albus dumbledore.

i find dumbledore bashing incredibly boring - not because dumbledore is a character i think of as morally spotless, but because the way he's criticised in certain areas of this fandom becomes dull by virtue of never actually engaging with interesting critiques of his character and decisions.

dumbledore is not some machiavellian evil genius - the entire point of deathly hallows is that the omniscient vibe that he projects in the first six books isn't actually omniscience at all, and it always irks me to see authors miss this, and ascribe to malice what is clearly human fallibility. nor is dumbledore intentionally or egregiously manipulative or cruel. and nor is there something "wrong" with him.

[the closest i've come recently to throwing my laptop at the wall was seeing a nonsensical post proposing that one of the reasons why it's fine to think of him as a villain is that he has anti-social personality disorder. not because i think it's inappropriate to assign diagnoses to fictional characters, but because i think if you do wish to do that you should attempt to know what you're talking about... and (evidently quite poorly) reading the wikipedia summary of an extremely complex disorder is not that.]

dumbledore is a wartime paramilitary leader - and wartime leaders have to make extraordinarily complex decisions, often ones which result in harm befalling their soldiers. the series is generally fairly weak on the realities of war - since its genre conventions require it to end with all being well - but what it shows of dumbledore's tactics is one area in which it shines.

and it also gives us plenty of meat if we want to emphasise the ways in which he's inadmirable.

dumbledore is a creature of stasis - he holds radical views, but he does nothing to actually advance them in society [this is a man who is at the heart of the establishment for half a century, who does nothing with that power to dismantle the oppressive social structures which drive wizarding politics and prop up blood-supremacy], and he also has a tendency to adopt a "wait and see" approach in situations where intervention would be obviously more appropriate. dumbledore is a hypocrite - he’s happy to be depended on by fudge, he is appalled that fudge might depend on lucius malfoy. dumbledore lives in an ivory tower, and clearly has little interest in the ways poverty, violence, and isolation affect people. dumbledore projects his shame and self-loathing onto others in a way which is detrimental to their own happiness. and so on.

all of these flaws have a tangible impact on the arc of the series - and dumbledore's failure to take meaningful action to prevent either voldemort or snape's radicalisation is something i think he can be genuinely criticised for - but they can't be taken in isolation. dumbledore fucks up because he's just one man - and the character flaws which cause him to fuck up also contribute to many of his most admirable traits: his mercy; his courage; his steadfastness; and his faith.

and it's so much more interesting than reducing him to a one-note caricature of evil!

what is a popular ship you just can't get behind, and why?

dramione, because i have a very low tolerance for both fanon!hermione and fanon!draco.

i think it could be done interestingly... i've just never seen it.

which character is way hotter than everyone else seems to think?

which got two more shoutouts:

arthur and molly weasley.

they both clearly fuck - and the lack of respect they receive for this in the fandom is because of the tiresome association of sex with youth and [one, very narrow, view of] beauty [hence why characters like snape often become mysteriously hot when they're being written in romantic pairings...], meaning that both of them being middle-aged, arthur balding, and molly being fat means that the fact that they're clearly obsessed with each other never gets the attention it deserves.

[createserenity]

What are the rainbows all about?

There’s more than one. We all know about the rainbow that fades in over Crowley after the failed awning kiss scene, but what about the other times they appear? This is just after he talks to Nina about how she feels about sudden rain so it might just be linked to that.

Why a rainbow here though? I don’t think it’s just the connotations of the rain being similar to the rain in The Flood. Crowley covers the sky with black clouds and then doesn’t miracle them away so for these to instantly disperse and a rainbow to appear (we see the sun is instantly back and everyone has put down their umbrellas through the bookshop window) seems like it would need some outside influence. Should we interpret as being a sign sent by somebody? And if so, who? The Almighty?

If you ask someone what the meaning and purpose of the rainbow is in the story of Noah’s Ark they will generally say it’s a sign to humans that God won’t flood the earth/destroy all life again, with the implication that the rainbow is for humans to remind us of this. That is partly the intention, and it’s established truth in the GO universe because Aziraphale tells Crowley that the Almighty is going to put up a rainbow “as a promise not to drown everyone again”. 

There is another purpose to the rainbow though in the “real world” Bible, one which is repeated several times during God’s speech to Noah in Genesis.

“Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. (…) Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth.”

This is God speaking here, so the I is God. They’re saying that future rainbows will not be sent by them, but will appear naturally and will serve as a reminder to themself that they promised not to drown everyone again. What God is saying in this part of the Bible seems to be along the lines of, you humans are imperfect and this angers me, but also I know I am vengeful and that this is not good. Because I’m fallible and liable to forget my promise I’m making this thing that will appear of its own accord in certain conditions to remind me to check my vengeful nature.

It's interesting really because God is supposed to be infallible, that’s one of the main points, except this speech by God is suggesting quite literally that they know they are fallible. If they weren’t they wouldn’t need a reminder.

I guess how the rainbow over Crowley is interpreted depends on how much whoever decided to put it there from the GO production team really knows about the story of the rainbow. If they only know that it as a sign to humans then it could have an entirely different meaning than if the decision to put it there was made by someone who knows it was a reminder to God as well.

Why does the rainbow appear here?

Since the rainbow is to remind God not to end all life on earth again could this be something to do with season 3? A reminder of that promise and a suggestion that the Almighty herself doesn’t actually want life ended? I’m not so sure about this one because we are repeatedly shown that in GO the Almighty is fully capable of doing cruel things (like sentencing Job’s children to death – unless we see this as weird complicated test of Crowley because God is playing a game of her own devising), so to have it suddenly turned around and have her not be in control of the divine plan seems odd (but then she is odd, absolutely bonkers if her speech to Job is anything to go by – the Almighty of the GO universe doesn’t seem very sane or logical).

It’s also strange that the rainbow, a promise to humanity and reminder to the Almighty not to drown everyone again is followed by Gabriel saying, “There will come a tempest, and darkness, and great storms”. So what is that saying about the original promise? Or what is the rainbow telling us about the statement that follows?

Maybe it’s more literally related to the vavoom moment Crowley is trying to create here. We’ve just watched a deluge of water ruin his attempts to get Maggie and Nina to fall in love. Could the awning ripping be interpreted as an act of God? If so the rainbow could be some sort of comment on that act and the fact that it meant his attempt at creating that moment for Nina and Maggie didn’t go quite right. A sort of, I did say I wouldn’t drown everyone again, but I couldn’t let this vavoom moment work so I had to drown (soak) them. If so that begs the questions – why? Why did the Almighty not want this particular moment to work out? Simply thwarting a demon’s plans, or something more?

I don’t really have any answers here. These are all just random musings, maybe someone who is better at research and interpretation of scenes can take up these questions. It’s really not my forte!

Another idea, which is probably a bit out there, inspired by this meta by @vidavalor.

It’s a very long meta, but a really fun read. To summarise though it is all about her theory that Crowley and Aziraphale kissed for the first time way back after The Flood happened (there’s so much more to it, seriously do read it!) So what’s this got to do with the rainbow? Well, whilst I love the idea that they’ve been doing something all along I don’t think that’s what Neil is writing here and I don’t actually expect it to be the case. (I might be totally wrong of course and I do love playing with this theory for fun, as in this post and this one). I do kind of buy into the idea though that he might be writing a story where they have had an almost-kiss before – specifically that Crowley might have tried or wanted to kiss Aziraphale before and Aziraphale has either rejected it, not noticed or it’s been stopped by outside influences. There’s so much great meta out there about how 1941 might have been the time when Crowley tried for a kiss and Aziraphale rejected him either before or afterwards, which does seem the most likely time in their history for that to happen. What if the almost-kiss happened not in the bookshop but later whilst they were tracking down the zombies (I believe Neil has hinted they might return in season 3) and then it was prevented by a deluge of water in some way? (And afterwards Aziraphale decided it would have been a bad idea – hence, “you go to fast for me, Crowley” in 1967.)

Or what if there were previous times when Crowley wanted to kiss but Aziraphale was just oblivious? Could it have been at the flood? They did something together (maybe saved some people?), went and sheltered from the rain under a canopy of trees, looked into each other’s eyes and then Crowley had a moment of realisation, I want to kiss this angel, but before he could act on it they were stopped by a deluge of water. Not the rain (that was already falling and wouldn’t have stopped them by itself) but by the other form of flooding that happened during this story. Specifically, this from Genesis 7:11:

“on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.”

So a deluge stopped a kiss during the flood or in 1941. Now another deluge has stopped Maggie and Nina’s potential kiss. Could the rainbow be a sign to Crowley? Next time I promise I won’t do that to you.

If it’s that and then the bookshop kiss is the one that isn’t stopped by water then the Almighty really is playing a pretty strange game with these two.

Are there anymore rainbows?

Yes, two other appearances of rainbows. The very first time we see a rainbow is when the angels come to check on Aziraphale after they spot the plume from the Jim miracle. It appears in front of him and then sweeps over the angels as the camera pans around. The only significance I can see here is that this is the start of the whole “love” thing with Maggie and Nina that later leads to the awning scene. It's also the only time I can find where they appear with Aziraphale on screen rather than Crowley.

The last time we see rainbows is in the final 15 minutes. Firstly one appears on the window of the Bentley when Crowley watches Aziraphale leave. This is not a great screenshot, it's across the window in line with his watch and a second after this the rainbow becomes clearer and actually doubles up so there’s two of them.

Finally when Crowley is driving away right at the end once again the rainbow plays over the Bentley. Another promise? Or just a sign of hope, which is the other meaning ascribed to a rainbow?

What do these rainbows mean?

I have no clue. Honestly, it could just be that the whole theme of this season seems to revolve a lot around colour and using light and rainbows might just be an extension of that with no other meaning. The world is super colourful a lot of the time, I mean it’s literally painted rainbow colours, with the shop fronts all being different colours and the extras all wearing super bright clothing – notably an awful lot of orange and orange-yellow tones.

Interestingly in this rainbow world that GO shows us the colour purple is missing a lot of the time. It appears in the tartan various characters wear (Aziraphale, Saraqael etc) but doesn’t seem to appear much elsewhere except in the rainbows (it’s difficult to see in the rainbows but it is there, indigo and violet are difficult to see in real life rainbows to due to the length of the light waves). Purple is the colour associated with royalty, authority and notably Jesus at Easter so it’s intriguing that it is missing from the rainbow of the world here.

Anyway the point is I find all this strange. Could be something, could be nothing. I’m just a bit obsessed with noticing details at this stage!

[nothorses]

The worst part of trying to talk about my experiences as a trans man is worrying that I’m not remembering it right, or it wasn’t that bad, or I’m being manipulative, or like I’m driven by secret prejudices and if I just recognized them then I’d immediately see that my life is fine. The longer it goes on the more I feel like I hallucinated it or dreamed up a memory to confirm … idk what. Do you or anyone else have advice about that? Other than “you can do whatever you want forever, hit the bricks” because intellectually I do get that but in practice I feel really lonely and “whatever I want” all alone sucks.

I've experienced a lot of that self-doubt as well, and I very much relate. I think what has helped me the most, over time, is:

a) Repeated confirmation & validation of my own memory, and

b) Understanding why someone might invalidate my memory in the first place

Pretty much in that order!

What that looked like for me was starting to write things down, or talk about them to someone else when they happened, and then going back to remember those things later when the memory felt less tangible. When I look back on the things I've written especially, it feels genuinely crazy to me that I ever forgot how severe some of those experiences were, and even crazier that I allowed someone to convince me I was wrong about them. When I had that experience multiple times, and over time, I started to learn that I could trust myself more than I had previously been taught to.

Understanding the reasons someone might have for doing this was also helpful! Humans are fallible, and our memories can become distorted over time, and it's important to remember that other people are just as likely to make mistakes as we are. They might legitimately believe they're right, and not be. You probably aren't more or less likely to do that than anyone else is; and if you are more likely to do that, the answer still isn't to just assume you're always wrong, because you're not always wrong- nobody is!

Other people are also just as likely as you are to be influenced by their own personal biases. Consider what's at stake for people who might want you to be wrong about your own memories: what kind of fear might they be feeling? What kind of guilt will they have to grapple with if they're forced to change their worldview?

I don't think it's ever a good idea to completely shut out all possible criticism or possibility that you're wrong, but it's just as unhealthy to be completely incapable of trusting yourself. The solution lies in the nuance, in holding both truths at once: you might be wrong, but you also might be right. What's more likely? Who is most likely to know the truth, or at least be closer to it? How can you check? What biases are present for you and others involved? How can you check them, and keep them in check?

I find that working through it this way- with the nuance included- is genuinely more reassuring to me than if I were to try to just throw out all possibility of being wrong.

I don't know how helpful that is to you, but hopefully something in there is useful!! Good luck!

[agentmarvel]

nfsw alphabet - könig

afab!reader

mdni - 18+; minors and ageless blogs will be blocked

divider credit: @/cafekitsune

♡ a = aftercare (what they’re like after sex)

- Kö is v needy after sex. Between his younger years and his military career, he's admittedly incredibly touch-starved. The endorphin rush of intimacy is often followed by an intense crash for him - one he'd only ever experienced prior after a rather high-profile target was stamped out like a cigarette beneath his boot - and he just needs to hold you for a while.

♡ b = body part (their favorite body part of theirs and also their partner’s)

- He absolutely adores your lips. They're a perfect compliment to his own. Where his are dry and scarred, thinner and mildly perpetually bruised, yours are soft and pillowy, unblemished by the atrocities of exposure. Your lips fit with his like lock and key. And your smile? Fuck. His day doesn't start until he sees that little quirk at the corner of your mouth. And don't even get him started on the things those lips do in the bedroom...

For himself, he's quite fond of his eyes. He likes the color, thinks it suits him well. Eyes are the window to the soul, so they say, and it's his reminder that he's still human. He's fallible. He will make bad calls sometimes, even when it comes to his relationship with you, but he's not immune to mistakes. When you look him in the eyes, he knows you can see his sincerity, whether he's telling you he loves you or apologizing for being too blunt on accident.

♡ c = cum (anything to do with cum, basically)

- König has an obsession with fluid strings. Regardless of whether he's pulling out of your mouth or your cunt after cumming, the milky threads of arousal that keep you connected just a few moments longer drive him to the brink of insanity. He's almost cum again immediately after just from the sight.

♡ d = dirty secret (pretty self-explanatory, a dirty secret of theirs)

- He loves kissing you after you swallow his load. Something about tasting himself on you makes him violently feral. He's hard again within seconds, not that he ever really flagged to begin with.

♡ e = experience (how experienced are they? do they know what they’re doing?)

- Painfully minimal experience. Frankly, you're the second person he's ever had sex with, and the first was a one-off hook-up when he was much younger. He's learning the things he likes with you, though, and that's better than any number of previous partners could've amounted to. Besides, his ambition and unwillingness to disappoint more than makes up for the occasional awkwardness.

♡ f = favorite position

- König loves any position that puts you on top. He's well aware that he's a lot to take - you're never shy about telling him just how fucking big he is - and he knows you'll take as much as you can handle. Eventually, though, he needs more. When you manage to take him to the hilt, blissed out above him, unable to control the pretty sounds coming from deep in your chest, that's his cue. He'll gather your wrists in one hand, pinning them to your lower back before pulling you down to his chest and using his long legs as leverage to fuck up into you brutally. You always end up practically screaming in his ear, and he's so into it.

♡ g = goofy (are they more serious in the moment? are they humorous? etc.)

- He tends to be more serious, but only because he's usually focused. The playfulness is still present, just not as prevalent as it is in less intimate contexts.

♡ h = hair (how well-groomed are they? does the carpet match the drapes? etc.)

- Personally, I think Kö has long, dark, so the carpet is the same shade. He keeps it neater when he's home, knowing how often that thatch of curls provides you with extra stimulation but not loving how patchy it gets between his pelvis and navel due to the plethora of scars. Less mass makes it clear the gaps are filled with angry, raised lines. He's very self-conscious about things like that, despite knowing it doesn't sway your affections for him.

♡ i = intimacy (how are they during the moment? the romantic aspect)

- The intimacy is always at 11. Love and sex are synonymous to him, two sides of the same coin. You can't have one without the other. König LOVES the moment where he can switch to slow, deep strokes, making you look at him while he professes his adoration so wholly that he nearly has you tearing up.

♡ j = jack off (masturbation headcanon)

- Surprisingly, he isn't too keen on rubbing one out too often. He might have a mild masochistic streak because he would prefer to bottle it all up to increase the anticipation of coming home, even if his balls are full, heavy, and aching to be drained by the time he returns.

♡ k = kink (one or more of their kinks)

- Your beloved König is shy to admit, but he noticeably loses his mind when you're a little mean to him. He loves the way you edge him for hours, making him count out loud, the condescending fringe of your voice when you tell him to beg for what he wants, the tense grip you keep on a fistful of his hair while you ride his watering mouth. It does something to him that he can't quite describe. Maybe it's the relief of knowing he's safe in giving up control. Maybe it's the implicit trust that you'd never hurt him. Sometimes, that's just what he needs.

♡ l = location (favorite places to do the do)

- He's partial to the kitchen. The table and countertops are taller than standard to accommodate his height, so when he bends you over one, you're entirely at his mercy with your feet dangling just above the tile. He's not crazy about the bruises he's found on your hips after, but something about having you in that helpless state makes him cum that much faster.

♡ m = motivation (what turns them on, gets them going)

- Cliché, maybe, but he's partial to the way you fuss over him after a mission. Doesn't matter how long or short, you're on him the second he gets through the door, smothering him in kisses and ready to check him for injuries and rub the knots out of his shoulders. You typically encourage him to discuss what he can, let him vent about the things that went wrong and hype of everything that went as planned. Really, his motivation is purely how much you genuinely care for him in all facets.

♡ n = no (something they wouldn’t do, turn offs)

- He firmly refuses breathplay and bondage. As someone who's been on the giving and receiving ends of literal torture, he's not fond of reliving any part of it with his partner. You're his safe haven. Elements of the darker side of his job stay far away from you.

♡ o = oral (preference in giving or receiving, skill, etc.)

- He's balanced on giving and receiving in terms of preference. He enjoys both equally. Eating pussy is something he'd never done before you, so there was a learning curve at first, but now, it's something he couldn't live without. He knows exactly how to get you off with his mouth, and he takes pride in that.

♡ p = pace (are they fast and rough? slow and sensual? etc.)

- There are perks to different methods, but König has a preference for going slow. Make no mistake, that doesn't mean he's gentle. Calculated, punctuated thrusts meant to reach deeper inside you than your fingers can, meant to mould your cunt around the shape of his cock so nothing ever feels this good without him.

♡ q = quickie (their opinions on quickies, how often, etc.)

- Kö is pretty ambivalent. He understands the necessity at times and will indulge whenever it feels right. You're in the shower, and he wants you before you leave for work? Perfect. Easy clean-up, and you won't be late. He has to head to the airfield, and you make it back from lunch with your mother with 10 minutes to spare? He's done in half that time, sated and heading out the door in a significantly better mood.

♡ r = risk (are they game to experiment? do they take risks? etc.)

- Experimentation in the privacy of your home is fine with him, encouraged even. But he's really not big on risky business. He'd never chance getting caught; the thought alone curdles in his stomach like bad milk and makes him feel nauseous. It'd be embarrassing enough for him, but he'd be horrified on your behalf. Privacy is so important to him.

♡ s = stamina (how many rounds can they go for? how long do they last?)

- Honestly, his stamina is cruel. He can go for around an hour before he needs a break. Short refractory period, which is fine because even now, he cums fairly quickly. He's stopped apologizing for it by now, knowing you really don't have a problem with it. But he's not a selfish lover by any stretch; he'll keep going until he knows you're satisfied.

♡ t = toys (do they own toys? do they use them? on a partner or themselves?)

- Toys are still something he's working up to. He's a big fan of the little high-frequency vibrator you have that kind of looks like an electric toothbrush. It's small but powerful. You've both used it to edge the other, often enough that you've had to buy two more after the previous couldn't hold a charge.

♡ u = unfair (how much they like to tease)

- Truthfully, he's not a huge tease. He's very up front with you about what he wants and when he wants it. Again, that lack of filter. Loves when you tease him, though.

♡ v = volume (how loud they are, what sounds they make, etc.)

- Kö definitely isn't quiet. He's constantly muttering praise, flopping between German and English, begging you for more, bitte, baby, bitte. If you move just the right way or deny him, you'll get those involuntary whimpers with his pretty eyes rolling back. His dirty talk is top-notch because he really has no filter when he's inside you.

♡ w = wild card (a random headcanon for the character)

- Cockwarming. Eating dinner, watching a movie, reading, he wants you planted on him constantly. Sometimes, it leads to sex, but more often than not, it's the added layer of closeness that he's after. Touching you is comforting, and that level of intimacy calms the savage beast in his chest that wails at the thought of losing you.

♡ x = x-ray (let’s see what’s going on under those clothes)

- König is MASSIVE. He's so tall, broad-shouldered, with a narrow waist, deliciously thick thighs, and an absolute fuckin' wagon. All veins, muscles, and scars. I firmly believe he has a few hidden piercings beneath the hood and dozens of tattoos under his gear. No one will ever convince me that König doesn't look strikingly similar to Peter Steele.

9", uncut, too heavy to stand straight out when hard, slightly above average thickness.

♡ y = yearning (how high is their sex drive?)

- His drive is pretty moderate. Maybe 2-3 times a week, though that may just be so that you have time to recover.

♡ z = zzz (how quickly they fall asleep afterwards)

- Kö falls asleep pretty fast after. It's a lot of exertion for him, and having you curled into his chest, tracing little circles on his skin, is so soothing for him. It puts him out like a match into water, eyes not cracking open until the sun rises.

[lokh]

Okay, I won't lie NSW is more than slightly outside of my area of expertise when it comes to camping but the basics are the same anywhere. You said you have a tent and bag and some gear so we're not starting out at baby beginnings.

Step one, check the forecast. If its gonna be a heat wave or a cold snap or pissing rain wouldn't it be nice to know that before you're sitting miserable in a tent in the middle of nowhere? Plan accordingly, pack accordingly and you will be amazed how much you can deal with if you're prepared for it. Personally I have a nice rainshell with me at all times because it acts as a windbreak, water barrier, and exposure layer. I have taken a rainshell into the mojave desert where it never rains and I was right to do so because the wind got cold. I have occasionally been the overprepared dork, but I have more often been the only one not getting hypothermia.

Step two, know where you're going. As in, what to expect not just physically where it is. Are there restrooms? Water? Animals? Poisonous/stabby plants? Poisonous/stabby bugs? Other campers? Poisonous/stabby campers? Hazards? Cell service? Emergency services? Gas stations? Can you safely have a fire? Can you toast/grill your food or are you having cold dinner?

Step three, pack the most obscenely overdone toiletries kit you can imagine. Yes, this is actually important. My god, human bodies are messy. All your basic overnight goodies and then add sunscreen, bug dope, wet wipes or something similar, your own toilet paper and something to dig with if you're going out past available restrooms, and a small first aid kit. The kit doesn't have to be a full triage supply, tweezers, bandaids, antiseptic and maybe some gauze if you're clumsy. If you are gonna be doing a lot of walking/hiking I also recommend moleskin for blisters. Put the moleskin on BEFORE the blister pops.

Step four, look at the forecast again, assume it's wrong and pack for the worst weather possible. You need a dry pair of socks and undies. You need long sleeves and a spare shirt. Even if it doesn't feel like it, you will sweat through the day and get damp and if you sleep in the same thing you've been wearing you will get chilled. This is why every one says no cotton for camping, no matter where you are. I have a full change of clothes for sleeping so my day clothes can air and dry overnight.

Step five is food and its really each to his own for this one. If you're hiking out you will be more limited as far as weight/refrigeration, but thats somewhat of a trial and error thing. Freeze dried meals have their place but there is no reason it has to be your go to. Remember your water and remember that if you sweat and replace it with nothing but water you will be hurting. Powdered drink mix is your friend. If you're car camping and tenting next to the car I just bring a 5 gallon jug of water that stays in the car and refill waterbottles as needed. (Note: Senshi from dungeon meshi isn't actually an unattainable fantasy, you can cook a full scale meal in the backcountry if you really want to. It is several magnitudes more difficult than you would think if you are used to cooking in a kitchen, but it is possible.)

Step six is assessing your gadgets. If you want your phone you probably need a power pack to charge it. You will want a flashlight for the dark, not your phone, not glowsticks. If you want a camera you have to figure out how to carry that with you. You also need to figure out if you have cell service and a way to call for help. The more intense you get into this, the more you should look at getting a GPS or inreach/spot device, especially if you want to go alone. This is also a good time to come to grips with the falliblity of technology and get a paper map.

Step seven is for sleeping arrangements, which you seem to have covered. My rip is to set up sleeping stuff as soon as you get to where your making camp, so that way your bag has a chance to loft and your aren't fiddling with stuff sacks in the dark when your tired. And drunk if you're party camping. Open the sleeping bag before the tequila. Also a sleeping pad will protect your bag and also your joints so you don't wake up feeling like Rip van Winkle.

Have fun, be safe, don't be a dick and clean up after your self at your campsite. Sleeping in the dirt is a great time and I hope you enjoy your trip.

thank you so much!!!! i had a great trip but it wouldve been better if id followed your advice more carefully LMAO

[madmaenad]

What canon says about Indra Ōtsutsuki

Indra Ōtsutsuki is the inventor of ninjutsu and the first human to bear the Sharingan, making him the ancestor of the Uchiha Clan. 

He has just three appearances in the entire manga, all of which are from secondhand sources.

1. Our most direct source on Indra is his father Hagoromo, the Sage of Six Paths, in chapters 670-671:

Hagoromo goes on to talk about the beginnings of his sons’ reincarnation cycle:

As well as the prior generation of incarnates:

He also makes one intriguing mention of how Indra anticipated the reappearance of the Rinnegan, which requires Indra and Ashura’s chakra to fuse together in one vessel:

Since we have no corroborating testimony elsewhere, assessing the accuracy of Hagoromo’s story requires us to examine it for bias.

It is worth mentioning that Indra shares the Sharingan with his grandmother Kaguya, who was sealed away by Hagoromo and his brother. This likely had a negative effect on Hagoromo’s view of his son, as he seems to distrust the Sharingan’s power:

Hagoromo connects his mother and his son in other aspects, as shown in the panels below where Hagoromo describes his own views on power compared to Kaguya's. His description of Kaguya’s hunger for power resembles his earlier description of what he claims are Indra’s views.

If you need further proof that Hagoromo negatively equates his mother and his son, despite the two never having met, look no further than the panel below:

In short, Hagoromo says the world of the Fourth Shinobi World War is Indra’s (and Kaguya’s) world. Hagoromo blames his son, and his son’s refusal to accept Ashura, for the current war. This seems a curious thing to assert, since Hagoromo never states outright that Indra killed or even harmed anyone, despite the panel of Indra in armor. He only says that, “Indra turned upon Ashura.”

One final note on the Sage’s story. In a great irony, at some point the historical record credited Hagoromo with the creation of ninjutsu, instead of Indra himself:

Once more, Hagoromo outright equates his son with war, and accuses his son of being a warmonger. 

We have to question Hagoromo’s knowledge of his son’s internal motivations, especially since we have no evidence except Hagoromo‘s own testimony. Inventions can be used outside of their inventor’s intended purpose. Ninjutsu being used in war does not automatically mean it was made to create war. Was this really what Indra intended, or is this Hagoromo‘s own assumption after the fact?

2. Black Zetsu also knew Indra firsthand, and briefly mentions him in chapter 682.

Despite being an enemy, Black Zetsu can be considered a fairly reliable source. He recounts his story to Naruto and Sasuke while Kaguya is draining their chakra. With the two already immobilized and helpless, there’s no need for manipulation. Zetsu gains nothing by lying to them.

Crucially, Hagoromo’s story never once mentions Black Zetsu. Hagoromo appears to know nothing about Zetsu’s influence on Indra and Indra’s descendants. Hagoromo claims to have precognition and the ability to read signs (670) and also claims to have watched his children fight throughout history (671), but Zetsu gives us direct evidence that Hagoromo’s omniscience is fallible, and his story is far less authoritative than it seemed on the surface. 

Hagoromo is missing important pieces of the narrative, though he is not aware of it. His ignorance calls his testimony about Indra’s nature, Indra’s motivations, and the true sequence of events further into question.

3. Our last source is Obito, who tells a mythologized version of Indra’s story in chapter 462.

This version has the most questionable accuracy. Rather than direct testimony by someone who knew Indra, it’s a story passed down over generations. 

Another complicating factor is the context in which this story is told. Obito (pretending to be Madara) tells the story to Naruto and Kakashi with the aim of convincing Naruto that Sasuke’s desire for revenge is genuine. Obito is lying about his identity; it is possible that Obito is further altering the story to manipulate his listeners.

Hagoromo made no mention of any curse in his story. Did he just leave it out? Is this a misinterpretation of Hagoromo’s belief that power drives people mad? Or did later generations invent the idea of a curse? 

Obito, in his Madara persona, claims his battle with Hashirama was destined and that Naruto and Sasuke are equally destined to be enemies. Obito’s intent to influence Naruto makes the way he also casts Indra and Ashura as implacable enemies somewhat suspect. But that doesn’t mean Obito’s version is a complete lie; there’s probably a grain of truth in the basic events.

One question worth asking: who does the seed of this myth belong to? Is it from Konoha? The Uchiha? 

Consider instead: who is famous for calling the Uchiha a cursed clan? 

Senju Tobirama. He is the oldest character to call the Uchiha cursed; a manga chapter is even titled after this exact quote from him (619). The way Obito’s story equates the Uchiha with hatred resembles the rumors Tobirama related to Hashirama prior to the Hokage election (625).

This fact, plus the unflattering portrayal of Indra, makes me believe Obito might actually be telling the Senju version of events.

4. What final conclusions can we draw about Indra’s character from these three portrayals? 

The narrative insists Indra believed in power and blames him for the current war...but we have little to no corroboration for this. The only crime directly attributed to Indra was from Obito’s mythology version, where he attacked his brother after being passed over for inheritance. 

The anime chose to make Indra into an a villainous character, but without much basis. There’s a lot of room for fandom to question, re-interpret, and develop new portrayals. 

His invention of ninjutsu, for example, must have been extraordinary for its time, but is consistently cast as a negative achievement. His relationship with his father is another point worth re-examining.

In the end, what do we know? 

Indra was born with strong chakra to a father who believed no one person’s chakra should be much greater than any other's. He was hailed as a genius and inherited the power of his grandmother’s eyes, which his father distrusted, but still chose to create his own techniques. Ninjutsu was Indra’s most lasting legacy, but one he never received credit for. He became a ghost in Shinobi history - and also a ghost of the narrative.

[penaltyboxboxbox]

to your point about f1 fandom not being that annoying, you’re so right. i’ve been in a variety of fandoms, some (*cough* voltron *cough*) where people literally tried to severely injure other people over ship discourse. nothing in f1 can top that, at least as far as i’ve seen ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

YES THIS LIKE....idk the vitriol that does go around in f1 fandom AT LEAST IN MY OPINION is pretty comparable to what happens in other niches of sports fans, just in a different way. like the way the harassment and hatred does proliferate imo, reminds me very much of how like...... non-online cis het men also bully and hate on each other about sports teams and players. not to say it doesnt get intense and deranged, just that its VERY DIFFERENT and dare i say? more socially acceptable- if not acceptable than Understood- than it is to do similar things over something like anime characters or a video game.

I mean the very nature of sports is creating in-groups and out-groups........we're expected to have a level of animosity towards each other, and i think theres a lot more of a level of understanding when fellow sport fans dont like you because of who you support, vs in traditional fandom there is not always that built in understanding of like "oh people who like x will not like you if you like y" and theres i guess a lot less established rules/norms around who is in what group/what's acceptable in that group/etc etc etc..

I think at the end of the day- wether we are talking rpf or not- the annoyingness of sports fandoms is a very different beast, as it is very much based in a media that is completely BUILT on fighting each other, being us vs them, so the people within that fandom have some sort of understanding of the beef that they may perpetrate or receive.........and it is all based off of REAL THINGS happening before our REAL EYES, and i think there is some understanding in that about how real people get things wrong or tell lies to cheat or whatever, because teams are made of real people and people are fallible and biased, the teams themselves are just as human and ever changing as the fandom is...

vs traditional fandom media was not made to be in-fought over, it is purely individuals perceiving the exact same fictional text through different lenses and deciding who is consuming that text right or wrong. I think the drama largely comes from there not being enough compelling conflict within the text, or not being able to deal with intense conflicts within the text, and just like. spewing all that all over the internet. Like we're having moral debates over the actions of villains from a childrens cartoon some days. Be serious.

At the end of the day i think people yearn to be a part of the in group, and fandoms a lot of the time, are kind of just sports for nerds, and i say that as a nerd. But because traditional fandom is not like sports, and they dont get real fights to be invested in every week, they have to just start fights with each other because their show doesnt have any new episodes or the sequel movie didnt get cleared.