#technology can be weird sometimes

[golden--doodler]

This isn't my finished, official Commission Sheet yet (I'm not doing Commissions at the moment), but I wanted to make a work-in-progress one that I can refine later for when I actually make them!

Feel free to leave any suggestions on how I can make it better.

Also, I forgot to add that once I actually do Commissions in the future, you can email me too if you prefer that :D

[soupmanspeaks]

you ever wonder if the Glamrocks's face tracking acts up when they look at Glamrock-Freddy, like they'll look at his face, and the recognition will register as Freddy, but their systems for whatever reason or another think that there is a face overlapped on Freddy's do you think they see two small squares next to him, at his side, roughly child sized, but no one is physically there.... right...?

[dykesynthezoid]

Truly a thesaurus is more useful to me as a brainfogged disabled writer than generative AI could ever be

[bmpmp3]

thank god for indie devs making like tiny little maximum 10 megabyte freeware games on itchio keeping the art of filesize optimization alive. ASSET REUSE FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[im-smart-i-swear]

self-indulgent fnin doodles cause existance is Not Fun right now:/

[sothischickshe]

It's so annoying how if you're editing (tags on) a post (down) in your drafts or queue that on save you're yanked back to the top of the page 😭😭😭😭😭😭

[gender-trash]

I would be very interested in hearing the museum design rant

by popular demand: Guy That Took One (1) Museum Studies Class Focused On Science Museums Rants About Art Museums. thank u for coming please have a seat

so. background. the concept of the "science museum" grew out of 1) the wunderkammer (cabinet of curiosities), also known as "hey check out all this weird cool shit i have", and 2) academic collections of natural history specimens (usually taxidermied) -- pre-photography these were super important for biological research (see also). early science museums usually grew out of university collections or bequests of some guy's Weird Shit Collection or both, and were focused on utility to researchers rather than educational value to the layperson (picture a room just, full of taxidermy birds with little labels on them and not a lot of curation outside that). eventually i guess they figured they could make more on admission by aiming for a mass audience? or maybe it was the cultural influence of all the world's fairs and shit (many of which also caused science museums to exist), which were aimed at a mass audience. or maybe it was because the research function became much more divorced from the museum function over time. i dunno. ANYWAY, science and technology museums nowadays have basically zero research function; the exhibits are designed more or less solely for educating the layperson (and very frequently the layperson is assumed to be a child, which does honestly irritate me, as an adult who likes to go to science museums). the collections are still there in case someone does need some DNA from one of the preserved bird skins, but items from the collections that are exhibited typically exist in service of the exhibit's conceptual message, rather than the other way around.

meanwhile at art museums they kind of haven't moved on from the "here is my pile of weird shit" paradigm, except it's "here is my pile of Fine Art". as far as i can tell, the thing that curators (and donors!) care about above all is The Collection. what artists are represented in The Collection? rich fucks derive personal prestige from donating their shit to The Collection. in big art museums usually something like 3-5% of the collection is ever on exhibit -- and sometimes they rotate stuff from the vault in and out, but let's be real, only a fraction of an art museum's square footage is temporary exhibits. they're not going to take the scream off display when it's like the only reason anyone who's not a giant nerd ever visits the norwegian national museum of art. most of the stuff in the vault just sits in the vault forever. like -- art museum curators, my dudes, do you think the general public gives a SINGLE FUCK what's in The Collection that isn't on display? no!! but i guarantee you it will never occur, ever, to an art museum curator that they could print-to-scale high-res images of artworks that are NOT in The Collection in order to contextualize the art in an exhibit, because items that are not in The Collection functionally do not exist to them. (and of course there's the deaccessioning discourse -- tumblr collectively has some level of awareness that repatriation is A Whole Kettle of Worms but even just garden-variety selling off parts of The Collection is a huge hairy fucking deal. check out deaccessioning and its discontents; it's a banger read if you're into This Kind Of Thing.)

with the contents of The Collection foregrounded like this, what you wind up with is art museum exhibits where the exhibit's message is kind of downstream of what shit you've got in the collection. often the message is just "here is some art from [century] [location]", or, if someone felt like doing a little exhibit design one fine morning, "here is some art from [century] [location] which is interesting for [reason]". the displays are SOOOOO bad by science museum standards -- if you're lucky you get a little explanatory placard in tiny font relating the art to an art movement or to its historical context or to the artist's career. if you're unlucky you get artist name, date, and medium. fucker most of the people who visit your museum know Jack Shit about art history why are you doing them dirty like this

(if you don't get it you're just not Cultured enough. fuck you, we're the art museum!)

i think i've talked about this before on this blog but the best-exhibited art exhibit i've ever been to was actually at the boston museum of science, in this traveling leonardo da vinci exhibit where they'd done a bunch of historical reconstructions of inventions out of his notebooks, and that was the main Thing, but also they had a whole little exhibit devoted to the mona lisa. obviously they didn't even have the real fucking mona lisa, but they went into a lot of detail on like -- here's some X-ray and UV photos of it, and here's how art experts interpret them. here's a (photo of a) contemporary study of the finished painting, which we've cleaned the yellowed varnish off of, so you can see what the colors looked like before the varnish yellowed. here's why we can't clean the varnish off the actual painting (da vinci used multiple varnish layers and thinned paints to translucency with varnish to create the illusion of depth, which means we now can't remove the yellowed varnish without stripping paint).

even if you don't go into that level of depth about every painting (and how could you? there absolutely wouldn't be space), you could at least talk a little about, like, pigment availability -- pigment availability is an INCREDIBLY useful lens for looking at historical paintings and, unbelievably, never once have i seen an art museum exhibit discuss it (and i've been to a lot of art museums). you know how medieval european religious paintings often have funky skin tones? THEY HADN'T INVENTED CADMIUM PIGMENTS YET. for red pigments you had like... red ochre (a muted earth-based pigment, like all ochres and umbers), vermilion (ESPENSIVE), alizarin crimson (aka madder -- this is one of my favorite reds, but it's cool-toned and NOT good for mixing most skintones), carmine/cochineal (ALSO ESPENSIVE, and purple-ish so you wouldn't want to use it for skintones anyway), red lead/minium (cheaper than vermilion), indian red/various other iron oxide reds, and apparently fucking realgar? sure. whatever. what the hell was i talking about.

oh yeah -- anyway, i'd kill for an art exhibit that's just, like, one or two oil paintings from each century for six centuries, with sample palettes of the pigments they used. but no! if an art museum curator has to put in any level of effort beyond writing up a little placard and maybe a room-level text block, they'll literally keel over and die. dude, every piece of art was made in a material context for a social purpose! it's completely deranged to divorce it from its material context and only mention the social purpose insofar as it matters to art history the field. for god's sake half the time the placard doesn't even tell you if the thing was a commission or not. there's a lot to be said about edo period woodblock prints and mass culture driven by the growing merchant class! the met has a fuckton of edo period prints; they could get a hell of an exhibit out of that!

or, tying back to an earlier thread -- the detroit institute of arts has got a solid like eight picasso paintings. when i went, they were kind of just... hanging out in a room. fuck it, let's make this an exhibit! picasso's an artist who pretty famously had Periods, right? why don't you group the paintings by period, and if you've only got one or two (or even zero!) from a particular period, pad it out with some decent life-size prints so i can compare them and get a better sense for the overarching similarities? and then arrange them all in a timeline, with little summaries of what each Period was ~about~? that'd teach me a hell of a lot more about picasso -- but you'd have to admit you don't have Every Cool Painting Ever in The Collection, which is illegalé.

also thinking about the mit museum temporary exhibit i saw briefly (sorry, i was only there for like 10 minutes because i arrived early for a meeting and didn't get a chance to go through it super thoroughly) of a bunch of ship technical drawings from the Hart nautical collection. if you handed this shit to an art museum curator they'd just stick it on the wall and tell you to stand around and look at it until you Understood. so anyway the mit museum had this enormous room-sized diorama of various hull shapes and how they sat in the water and their benefits and drawbacks, placed below the relevant technical drawings.

tbh i think the main problem is that art museum people and science museum people are completely different sets of people, trained in completely different curatorial traditions. it would not occur to an art museum curator to do anything like this because they're probably from the ~art world~ -- maybe they have experience working at an art gallery, or working as an art buyer for a rich collector, neither of which is in any way pedagogical. nobody thinks an exhibit of historical clothing should work like a clothing store but it's fine when it's art, i guess?

also the experience of going to an art museum is pretty user-hostile, i have to say. there's never enough benches, and if you want a backrest, fuck you. fuck you if going up stairs is painful; use our shitty elevator in the corner that we begrudgingly have for wheelchair accessibility, if you can find it. fuck you if you can't see very well, and need to be closer to the art. fuck you if you need to hydrate or eat food regularly; go to our stupid little overpriced cafeteria, and fuck you if we don't actually sell any food you can eat. (obviously you don't want someone accidentally spilling a smoothie on the art, but there's no reason you couldn't provide little Safe For Eating Rooms where people could just duck in and monch a protein bar, except that then you couldn't sell them a $30 salad at the cafe.) fuck you if you're overwhelmed by noise in echoing rooms with hard surfaces and a lot of people in them. fuck you if you are TOO SHORT and so our overhead illumination generates BRIGHT REFLECTIONS ON THE SHINY VARNISH. we're the art museum! we don't give a shit!!!

[gender-euphowrya]

ok ngl galaxy buds 2 kinda fucking rule

[anadrenalineslut]

i think the weird narrative on tumblr that kids these days are somehow "more" cruel because they take videos of people in public is like forgetting about how we used to literally brand people for cheating on their spouses. public ridicule has ALWAYS been a part of our culture because that is how capitalism thrives and pretending like it's somehow "more" cruel to video someone having a break down in public or cyber bullying strangers etc etc are doing a LOT of revisionist fucking history. kids these days aren't more cruel and i wish you would stop spreading this narrative. its giving repackaged anti-progressiveness propaganda tbh.

[secondbeatsongs]

as a bi person, the bisexual flag brings me infinite joy and always puts a smile on my face, however as a person who has a Passion for Graphic Design, that undersaturated shade of purple infuriates me when it's used digitally

like, on an actual flag - which was its original purpose - it looks great!

those look fine! lovely, even! with the semi-transparent fabric, the way it catches the sunlight, it looks beautiful!

but now look at how it looks digitally

the pink and blue are so vibrant compared to the sad, lonely lavender!

and let's look at this statement from Michael Page, the creator of the bi flag:

(sidenote: he created this flag in 1998, so if his takes on bisexuality is different from yours, it's okay to notice that! a lot has changed since the 90s when it comes to lived experiences and the way we describe them. but, it's also important to respect his thoughts about this and the way he presented them, even if today, we'd probably not say that bi people "blend unnoticeably into both the gay/lesbian and straight communities.")

so in pantone colors, the pink is 226 C, the blue is 286 C, and the purple of the flag is 258 C.

but...here's the deal

Michael talks here about how the key to understanding the symbolism is to know that the purple blends into both the pink and blue. and on a physical flag, I think you can see that!

but digitally, it absolutely does not blend. it clashes badly, and looks oddly separate from the other two colors.

which got me wondering...what purple do you get if you actually blend 226 C and 286 C?

oh! oh, my god.

look at that! look at how nicely it fits between those colors!

look at it next to the original color scheme! look at how much more vibrant the purple is!

and friends. this is just blending through rgb! you get even more purple variations when you use other color spaces!

let's compare all of them:

(top: original, lab. middle: lrgb, lch. bottom: rgb, hsl)

look at all of the different purple options you can get just by combining these two colors!

if you want almost too-vibrant saturation, you can go hsl, if you want something more relaxed that's closer to the original, you can go lab or lrgb. and if you want to split the difference, lch is bright and violet, while rgb is there with its saturated but darker purple.

anyway, I guess I don't really have a point here? this isn't so much an informational post as it is Me Getting Weird About Colors, but I think it is a useful lesson about how colors look very different on screens compared to how they look on objects in real life.

and sometimes, I think it's okay to compensate for that.

out of all of these, this is my favorite bi flag:

it's the one where the colors were blended in lab color space. for me, the lighter, softer purple is close enough to the original bi flag purple, while also feeling like a smoother blend of the blue and pink

but that's just me! and it might not even look the same to you, since every screen is different, because technology is a nightmare!

anyway, thank you for coming with me on this colorful journey! I will now retreat back to inkscape and make pained sounds about inkstitch gradients until something tangible pulls me back into reality

[misterradio]

^__^

[arr-jim-lad]

a lot of people still have trouble spotting AI art and i just want to give some quick tips on how i usually quickly recognize it

often it's the smoothness of the image that sets off my initial alarms, a distinct lack of minor textures you'd expect from real things.

sometimes the texture doesn't match what it was supposed to represent, and often things look oddly soft and rubbery. the light doesn't bounce off it quite right and it feels over-rendered.

i've seen weird random blurring on many AI works as well

The longer you look, the more you realize that it's lopsided in several places, positions and distances of objects make no sense.

A closer inspection usually makes you notice the smudged details, which i think is what truly gives it away - AI mimics real patterns, but doesn't always nail them.

More complex small objects get smudged and blended together, and complex patterns look more like an oil spill rather than anything designed with clear vision and intent.

If there are any letters, they never look real or readable

I've seen people AI generate ""historical"" objects and paintings and post them with a fake caption, claiming that they are real

Be wary, because we live in a very uncertain age when it comes to information. Learn to spot AI-generated images, reverse image search and fact-check when something seems off.

In this case it's just a fake camera, but this technology can, will, and already is used in much more malicious ways.

[moongreenlight]

“Realistic Simon ‘Ghost’ Riley headcanons” and then it’s just the fun police.

Mdni. Nsfw below cut.

- It makes me want to scoop my fucking brain out with a spoon when people say that Simon ‘Ghost’ Riley is some shy, anxious soft boy. I really do not believe he’d need to be coddled after a nightmare or babied when he’s feeling angsty. He is fine, y’all. Please don’t call paw patrol.

He is a soldier. He’s a war criminal. He is traumatized to the point of numbness. He is fucked up and weird and insane and honestly I think that we should all let everybody have their thing.

I cannot fix him. I do not want to fix him. I can only make him worse.

- Sorry but I just cannot write him having any kind of romantic feelings toward Soap. I like writing their dynamic more brotherly.

Furthest they’ve gone is ‘locker room gay.’

Like Johnny sends him dick pics on occasion because he thinks it’s funny and it pisses Ghost off.

That being said, I do read the occasional Ghoap fic. I’m not a perfect person. Sometimes it’s just yummy delicious.

- Feel like he’s the kind of freak to intentionally go to the gym without headphones. Something about discipline. Opting to just stare at the wall in front of him while he’s doing cardio or counting repetitions of exercises.

But on the rare occasion that he does indulge himself, he has a playlist of like 5-6 songs he likes and when it ends he just goes back to silence. Divorced dad rock. Chorded headphones only.

- Doesn’t have the debilitating commitment issues as people paint him out to have. Just commitment-phobic. Obviously stems from his past. He’s got that sexy deep rooted fear of abandonment or something horrible happening to people he actually lets close to him. But he’s not completely turned off by the idea of romantic attachments or close friends, just a little hesitant to open himself up to that kind of opportunity.

Probably very cagey about romantic partners. Doesn’t want the guys to know about you. Doesn’t keep pictures of you around his bunk or anything like that. He’s worried it’ll somehow compromise your safety. Worried about you getting swept up in his work.

- Women’s rights? Or Simon ‘Ghost’ Riley? I really do think he’d love to have a partner who lets him provide *everything* for them. He just wants to serve and protect. Wants his bird to be in a gilded cage all nice and safe and reliant on him for survival.

Doesn’t even really like the idea of you going to the grocery store by yourself. Would prefer if you just stayed put and tended his home and cooked him meals and let him dote on you and provide everything you could ever need.

- Has a really strange understanding of technology. He’s fine with the newer military stuff. That’s his element. He can do electrical wiring, set up a TV, install security cameras. That’s all whatever. But a cell phone? He doesn’t give a shit enough to keep up with the new updates and all the new things you have to learn when you get a smartphone. Wishes he would have kept a flip phone.

Texts like this: [OK. See youtonight.]

MAYBE has a private Facebook with no profile picture where the only things on his wall are Price wishing him a happy birthday every year.

His camera roll is like; 97 accidental screenshots of his Lock Screen, a few pictures of him and the task force boys, the inside of his pocket (another accident), a sunrise, a few cool things he found on missions, 34 pictures of Soap and Gaz when they took his phone.

- Insufferable in the early stages of trying to date him. Little to no communication other than basically demanding you meet him somewhere. Texting or talking on the phone? Like pulling fucking teeth. You think he’d rather be dead.

It was a headache getting him to go out in the first place. Maybe you worked at a bar where the guys would come to have a drink after a long day. He’s a little stand-offish but he’s handsome and he knows how to banter well enough for you to be persuaded by a coworker to slip him your number after you complained one too many times about a shit hookup or yet another terrible first date. It takes him nearly two weeks to phone you.

“Didn’t think you’d call.”

“Didn’t think I would either.”

He takes you out once, you think he seems sort-of interested, then he doesn’t phone or text you back for three days. You get over it. A few more dates in. You can tell he’s a bit more relaxed. A bit more open. You’re less worried that you’re a terrible conversationalist. Then he goes on a month long deployment without saying anything in advance. Radio fucking silent yet again. You want to tear your hair out. When he finally gets back, he’ll text you something like [Atthat pub you like. Drinks ?] completely out of the blue. You think you may actually go insane.

- Once he’s gotten used to you, it’s like the sole purpose of his life is to be your protector even if you’ve only recently convinced yourself he may want something casual. You’re small and grab-able. He knows how nasty people can be and what think when they see you. He needs to know that you’re taken care of, kept safe from such a scary world.

So he’ll just linger around you. All the time. Standing behind you when you’re at the till at the store, staring down the cashier who was only trying to be friendly when they asked if you had any fun plans for the rest of the day. Big arms folded over his chest. Looming so largely he threatens to eclipse you without taking a single step forward. Eyes burning a hole into the poor person who hastily finishes the transaction without another word.

Walking silently next to you in the evenings after you’re both off work; close enough to brush shoulders, but that’s about it. Listening to you chirp on about your day. Occasionally offering a small grunt of acknowledgement or a few words of interjection. Always walks on the side of the path that he thinks could pose you the most immediate danger. Shielding you from what may lurk in a darkened alley or a hedge or a small thicket of trees.

Scary dog privilege, but like… for when you go to fill your car up with gas in broad daylight in a good part of town and he insists on standing out there with you. ‘Just in case’ If he even lets you out of the car in the first place.

- AND OFF THAT POINT. I think once he’s decided that he’s actually fond of you, it goes from zero to a hundred so fast it makes your head spin.

Like the last time you spoke, it was still unclear on if you were keeping things casual or not and now you’re at dinner and the waiter just asked him if the two of you wanted dessert and Simon just grunts “dunno. Ask the missus.” ??? He sucks so bad I NEED him.

- As much as I love an overly possessive and jealous Simon, I saw this tweet that said “My girlfriend can wear what she wants because she’s a hoe and I knew that before we started dating” and it changed my life.

He’s secure enough not to need to cause a scene if someone makes a pass on you in public. He understands that you’re attractive and that other people are bound to find you attractive too. (Not that he doesn’t still want to pull their fingernails out one by one, threatening them and everything they love for daring to exist near you. He’s just got better control over himself than that. King.)

He knows he’s better than any of your other options. Nobody else could keep you as safe as he could. They don’t know the world like he does. They don’t know how breakable you are. How sweet and naive you can be.

Not to say he isn’t overly jealous and possessive, he just won’t pitch a fit in public.

LIKE dragging him to the bar with your friends and he sits at the table with all of your drinks. Him watching you dancing out of the corner of his eye, seeing some prat come up and grab your ass in passing. Or a group of guys dancing with your friends getting a little *too* close to you for his liking. He doesn’t do anything while the two of you are out- not wanting to ruin your fun. But that night after you’ve gotten back to his flat (He insisted. Closer to the bar. Uber was cheaper.) and he’s tearing your miniskirt off like it’s personally offended him. He’ll be a little rougher. A little more liberal with the marks his mouth leaves on your collarbones and inner thighs. His strong hands will grab at the fat of your hips a little harder than he should- leaving bruises where his fingers dug in. He’ll lean over you while you’re split open with his length, snarling down at you. “Had everyone’s attention tonight, didn’t you, pet?“ “You like havin’ eyes on you?” “Greedy fuckin’ slag.” “Can’t appreciate what you have.” “Need a reminder of who you’ve got to impress.” Maybe he’ll take you in front of a mirror, massive hand fixed on your jaw. Jerking your face up so you have to look at yourself being ruined by him. How pretty and slutty you look when your makeup is ruined by the tears he’s fucking out of you.

- He calls you ‘bird’ or ‘pet’ more often than anything else. A little on the nose for how he treats you. Like you’re some small, frail thing that can’t go a day without him. Stripped of your natural survival instincts and instead leaning on him for support and comfort and food and shelter. Just how he likes it.

GOD he’s a fucking freak. Gross and mean and fucked in the head. Makes my stomach hurt. I hate him. I wish I was schizophrenic so I could vividly hallucinate him.

[tanadrin]

Sometimes, Chris Hayes' podcast goes off on these weird tangents, and the most recent episode is one of them, quite explicitly. It's about the history of Polynesia, which is always a fascinating subject--the Polynesian expansion, and really the whole history of the Austronesian-speaking peoples, seems like one of those feats with rare equal in human history. It's one thing to roam over the vast steppes of Asia--it's quite another to take a canoe, stick some outriggers on it so it doesn't tip over, and start faring the open ocean.

One point his guest makes that I found interesting is that for the most part the atolls and little islands of the Pacific are a very harsh environment. Big volcanic archipelagoes like Hawaii and Aotearoa/New Zealand are rare. Atolls and other reef islands especially are functionally big limestone slabs, often without any source of fresh water, with no large mammals, and with few native plants you can eat. The weather is nice, sure (when there isn't a typhoon--and I can't help but think a typhoon on a little island must be terrifying indeed), but these are not inherently resource-rich places. That the Polynesian (and Micronesian and Melanesian!) peoples not only could travel those distances, but make permanent habitation on the islands they came across, is kind of crazy! You have to be really prepared, with a package of supplies and technologies that set you up for success. Long-distance trade is possible, but you're not gonna be running any kind of substantial import economy across hundreds or thousands of miles of ocean via catamarans.

The comparison that springs to mind to me isn't a historical one like the European age of exploration, which was overwhelmingly to places already peopled and productive, but to science fiction scenarios of space exploration. You'd have to have a little bit of the wild-eyed zealot to be the sort of person who ignores the cries of "there is no possible useful return on this investment" to settle most of these places. But they did! And they thrived for centuries!

[alostwanderernotfound]

Why do sometimes really weird & unexplainable things kind of happen?

Looking at the Theoretical Intersection between Anatomy & Physiology & Electronics

***This is coming from the perspective of attempting to explain (in the most simple ways possible) how foreign advanced technology possibly “hacks” the foundations of organic life. ***

Our bodies are composed of nerves. When electricity goes from one nerve and travels to another nerve then an action occurs. When something in our environment is sensed (like hearing a noise) our organs are able to sense the information & produce electricity to carry that information back to the brain to be processed.

Anatomically we have the brain, the spinal cord, our sensory organs, cranial nerves, and “all the other individually named nerves” that branch off of those.

(There is further differentiation between central nervous system, peripheral nervous system, & autonomic, and other ways to differentiate in anatomy and physiology, but for simplicity this is how I will refer to it).

Cranial nerves are differentiated out on the list in comparison to “other nerves” because they are a specific list of major nerves that do very important & essential functions in the body.

So, nerves act as a path for electricity to follow. This electricity can produce voluntary action or involuntary actions.

Choosing to raise your hand we consider voluntary action produced by the nervous system. When something occurs without your conscious choice & occurs automatically, it is considered an involuntary action of the nervous system. For example, your heart beating would be an involuntary action.

Nerves have gaps between them & in this space neurotransmitters are released. Neurotransmitters are chemicals with the ability to cause another nerve to have an action. Neurotransmitters have different actions at different places in the body. After neurotransmitters are released they stay in this space until they are broken down by the body. The body breaks down the neurotransmitters and attempts to recycle the components to be used to make other things in the body.

Our bodies are able to use electricity because of many processes, but one major one is because we store electrolytes. Our organs and tissues use electrolytes like Sodium and Potassium to create electrical charge. This “electrical spark” causes electricity to generate so that it can be conducted through the nerves.

The human body is very complex & requires more than just electricity to function due to many components of its design, but each neuron as an individual unit is incredibly similar functionally to wires bundled into computer cables.

How does this process intersect with technology?

If someone were to attempt to hurt you with insidiously with technology it could create A LOT of very weird experiences.

If you know how to electrically stimulate parts of the body, like if you put an electrical stimulator/microchip/or another component that alters electricity in someone’s nervous system you could do a lot of weird things that people with no medical background would struggle to explain.

Machinery causing electrical impulses or “shocks” to be sent to certain part of the brain can produce many effects.

If someone sent electrical impulses down the cranial nerves it would produce a wide range of effects.

If certain cranial nerves were stimulated by someone controlling a technological component then someone could cause your body to involuntarily do the following by stimulating one of the 12 cranial nerves with electricity:

Involuntarily, as if your body moved on its own, you could feel the following:

> Your eyes to move in a certain direction, like your eyes are “locking on” to an object. Similar to how a computer program is able to “lock on” to a target

> Cause your vocal cords to move even when your mouth isn’t open

>Jaw movement & other motions of the face

>cause vertigo/dizziness/altered proprioception or your sense of orientation in space. So a lot of the symptoms of being inebriated

>control of your tongue muscles

> ***Vagus nerve or cranial nerve 10 does a lot, tampering with it could do a lot of weird things *** Possibly weird respiratory and/or internal organ symptoms like shortness of breath, changes in swallowing like dysphagia, vocal hoarseness, & many other possible and serious side effects

> Specific neck movements & turns of the head

You could also produce the sensations in someone of:

>hearing voices that aren’t there or altered processing, they talk but it’s like you can’t understand

>hearing sounds that aren’t there or altered hearing

>seeing images that aren’t there or altered sight

>smelling things that aren’t there or altered smell

>feeling things that aren’t there or altered feeling

>tasting things that aren’t there or altered taste

All of these actions and the degree to which you could “control it” would vary. Some of these are more technically complex to do, but at the most basic level “micromovements” from even just these few nerves are highly likely.

Our bodies have more than just electricity that contribute to our ability to do voluntary control as a defensive system to prevent these types of tampering events from occurring, but I think on a basic level it would still be possible to do some of these micromovements.

Without a lot of technological advancement required, the most worrying to me is a combination of seizures (which can occur when you just overload something with electricity) and/or lots of trauma producing something similar to disassociation & making people hear voices. It unfortunately often produces a mind control like feeling where other people attempt to control and/or influence your behavior.

I think in the quest for mind control, some very bad people use these types of things to hurt other people & technological advancements in subliminal messaging have greatly hurt the world through our time.

In order to fix things I think we must first understand them.

[lunaa007]

Astrology observations #3

These are my personal observations and should be taken in the context of the whole chart, never isolated 😊

Some of this is 18+, no minors allowed

♦️Mars-Uranus aspects can indicate a liking for risky activities and extreme sports, like motorcycling or base jumping. They can even like to put themselves in danger as they need the adrenaline. Routine is super boring for them, they need to try new things very often. They should be careful to release this nervous energy with sports, work they're passionate about or things like that or it can backfire. This aspect can be tempered down with Saturn aspects or a lot of earth energy in the chart.

♦️Venus square mars aspect: can often be mean to the person they like, classic "if he pulled your hair it's because he likes you" stuff. Can be very passionate, might have difficulty to separate feelings from lust. They might have talent for artistic sports like dancing or ice skating. For women, they might like a more sporty fashion style.

♦️Sun-saturn aspects: especially for harsh ones, this can really change the expression of the sun sign. I know someone with sun and several planets in Leo, but they are all square to Saturn and you could never tell she's a Leo; she is very reserved, shy and restrained in life. But as with all Saturn aspects this can change with age, the personality coming through more and more while keeping an amazing sense of discipline, wisdom and grounding.

♦️Moon-uranus aspects: with harsh aspects (conjunction, square, opposition), the mother might have been emotionally cold during the childhood, and she might have been a bit erratic and unpredictable. This could have showed up as frequently moving places, or having a mother considered weird or crazy by society. With soft aspects like trine or sextile this could show up as an untraditional family, maybe having two fathers or two mothers, or parents very into technology, but this was not hard on the person and it helped them develop their individuality and independence.

♦️Taurus mercury: these people can learn much slower than other people (this does not mean they are not as intelligent, their rhythm is just different). At school they might have felt behind their schoolmates or felt like they didn't have enough time to finish their exams/homework. It is important that they don't feel bad about this and take the time they need to do their work. This might be less strong with Uranus influence on mercury. ♦️ Aquarius moon natals and their need to always read and watch self-development content without ever actually feeling their feelings 🙃

♦️ Venus conjunct moon: these people are so kind, they have such a big heart and do not wish harm on anyone, please stay mindful of who has access to you as many people might want to be in contact with this energy but sometimes also energy vampires.

♦️ Mercury conjunct/square pluto and their dark humor! I have this in my chart and one of my colleagues actually said to me three days after she started: "your jokes can be really dark sometimes" 😂 it gets worse when I'm tired as I don't filter my jokes so much before saying them. These aspects might also think a lot about death and dark themes, they can be the type to think "what happens if I die tomorrow", or "I could die if I do this" but not in a worried way, just thinking rationally about what is possible.

♦️ Leo mars women and their secret backup plan of becoming a stripper or an exotic dancer 💃 these women often have a talent for dancing, and performing can make them feel desired and confident.

♦️ Aries moon/mars placements and their road rage! Both my parents have these placements and my god the number of stressful rides to school I had when I was a child 😂 this can also apply to the other fire mars.

♦️ Lilith conjunct ascendant: these people often provoke reactions everywhere they go, they rarely go unnoticed whether it is positive reactions or negative. The women with this aspect might get sexualised a lot, and the men with this aspect might attract animosity from other men. ♦️ Sun-jupiter and moon-jupiter aspects: they might always see the bright side of things, "it will get better", "this is temporary", seeing the glass half-full. A lot of optimism, faith in a higher meaning, maybe too optimistic sometimes and too trusting that things will unfold in the right way.

♦️Mars square pluto women often attract creepy men on the street, interactions with aggressive men might be unfortunately common. It is important to not repress their anger and channel their power in something like martial arts.

♦️Gemini moon/IC: they might love to talk with their loved ones at home, a lot of communication and learning in their private life. If they live alone they might be a lot on the phone or always have music or tv or radio on.

♦️Mercury square saturn: they might doubt their intellectual abilities when young, their learning style might not fit the classic school system. It is important that they are encouraged by their family, and with time they will gain confidence and master the learning techniques that fit them best.

♦️Mars in virgo might care too much about pleasing their partner in bed and have a hard time receiving pleasure without giving anything. They might also feel self-conscious if they do not feel "clean" like not fresh out of the shower. It is important for them to practice letting go of their thoughts and doubts and be present in their body. They deserve pleasure as much as everybody else!

♦️ Jupiter in the 2nd house might have a very good self-esteem, if the moon and venus are not too afflicted. And if it is the case it helps the native deal with the harder aspects.

♦️ That's why it is so dangerous to interpret an  aspect in isolation of the rest of the chart, a challenging aspect might be very beneficial in a chart and less in another one. For instance moon conjunct saturn might be more challenging for a Capricorn moon which is already quite controled and closed off, but in the sign of Aries it might help the native tame their impulsivity and control better their emotions. 

♦️ Or moon square Uranus might be beneficial for a Capricorn moon or a Taurus moon as it might help them break out of their routine and become more adaptable and flexible to change.

Thank you for reading!

@lunaa007