How to make the best boxed Mac & Cheese

And make it actually (a little bit) better for you!

It’s easy:

  • Substitute Cream Cheese for the butter. This will require you to melt the cream cheese into the milk, since cream cheese resists melting normally. You’ll have to spend some time stirring it in. 

That’s right, it’s just one step. The result is super rich and creamy Mac & Cheese that has less calories and less fat (CC has about half of what butter has for each). 

It’s been said, when mankind reaches the end of the universe, we’ll find Jack Kirby’s name scrawled in the corner.

(via superrobotpilot)

I grew up seeing how Kirby and the people imitating him drew space, all surging nebula and bursts of energy and cloud-like formations and crackles and rifts. Then the Hubble showed that it was all out there.

That name, by the way, is going to be on a wall made up of immense statues of alien beings, some light-years tall. 

kittyhague:

makeitearlgrey:

bard-of-time-will-be-late:

underscorex:

THERE IS WATER AT THE BOTTOM OF THE OCEANCARRY THE WATERREMOVE THE WATER

Actually! This was a very clever setup by a team of divers in the Arctic, I believe. The person is upside down, their bouyancy belt calibrated just so that they are slightly lighter than water, and able to walk upside down on the ice. In the first segment, when his mask vents, watch the bubbles flow DOWNWARD, which is really the up that we know. Science is really fricking cool!



I LOVE YOU MAKEITEARLGRAY

kittyhague:

makeitearlgrey:

bard-of-time-will-be-late:

underscorex:

THERE IS WATER AT THE BOTTOM OF THE OCEAN

CARRY THE WATER

REMOVE THE WATER

Actually! This was a very clever setup by a team of divers in the Arctic, I believe. The person is upside down, their bouyancy belt calibrated just so that they are slightly lighter than water, and able to walk upside down on the ice. In the first segment, when his mask vents, watch the bubbles flow DOWNWARD, which is really the up that we know. Science is really fricking cool!

image

I LOVE YOU MAKEITEARLGRAY

Sexism and Gaming At It Again!

gomer21xx:

therealcountjackula:

So as you probably all know, the “gaming community” is at its own throat again over the issue of sexism. There are those that see the forces of equality as a threat to their hobby, and those that see machismo as an enemy to be eradicated. That’s a gross oversimplification of course, but in an issue as polarizing as sexism in gaming, there’s no room for the middle ground. It no longer matters who did what in response to who, both sides are behaving abominably.

The sexist assholes are more sexist asshole-y and the social justice warriors are taking a firm “you’re either with us or against us” stance. Harassment on both sides is awful. Police have become involved. But you know what the funny thing is?

None of that matters to the issue in debate.

No I’m serious, at the end of the day (as awful as it is) it’s just one side of the fandom warring with the other half. It has almost no bearing on the direction video games are going. Those decisions were made behind closed doors and you were not invited in. Those meetings where the direction video games were going to go was decided before Anita Sarkessian was a blip on the radar. And I’m going to tell you something: If you want more representation of woman in games, you are going to get your way.

In fact you’re already winning. You may have been too far up your own asses to notice, but the prevalence of female narrative in video games has exploded. Bioshock Infinite, Tomb Raider, Walking Dead Season 2, Mirror’s Edge, The Last of Us, and Remember Me are just the one that come to mind. Need I go on?

Argue all you want about how good the representation of women is in each of those, you would have to be a myopic ass spelunker not to see that the wind has shifted and will continue to shift. What I’m saying to those of you who consider yourself Social Justice Warriors: stop with the firm “you’re either with us or against us” crap. It’s not changing the way video games are made, in fact your angry ratings are not the harbingers of change. The studios decided, quite outside of your noise, to go in the more female inclusive route.

How do I know this? Because more woman now play video games, and every studio wants to be the first to carve out the biggest piece of that juicy new market. THAT’S why things are changing, the power of purchasing.

And yeah, I’m picking on the SJW side. The side whose motives I generally agree with, but whose tactics I absolutely abhor. Because as a male on your side, I get attacked by you way more than I do the sexist fuckheads on the other side. They are not asking me to choose a side, you are.

Does that seem unfair to ask you to both be good in your intentions and your actions? Well too bad, because guess what? The path of good is harder.

Every day I support a side that constantly interrogates me, questions if I am sufficiently loyal, and will not give me the benefit of the doubt because my gender matches that of the enemy. And yet I continue to believe in equality despite all the crap you people dish out.

I keep going because I really do think equality will create a better world. I would never put up with your bullshit otherwise.

Preach!

gomer21xx:

cythesomething:

arnaut-rosseau:

misskeeliebradshaw:

arte-mysia:

cheskamouse:

jklind:

firesoulblade123:

Legend of zelda link between worlds, and mega shark ve mecha shark. okay 

New Super Mario Bros. and Sin City… tough call.

Harry Potter and the world of Minecraft.

Star Trek: Into Diablo III.

(500) Days of Dragon Age.

Only Lovers Left Alive/Sims 2

Okami/Black Cauldron. 
… um. 

Pokémon X and… Lilo & Stitch, I think?
That’d make the post-Lilo & Stitch plots a LOT more interesting!  Imagine Jumba trying to wrangle all his other experiments together with the use of Pokéballs! XD

Starbound and a porn I do not care to name. So… yeah. The captain is on the bridge (Eyebrow waggle).

gomer21xx:

cythesomething:

arnaut-rosseau:

misskeeliebradshaw:

arte-mysia:

cheskamouse:

jklind:

firesoulblade123:

Legend of zelda link between worlds, and mega shark ve mecha shark. okay 

New Super Mario Bros. and Sin City… tough call.

Harry Potter and the world of Minecraft.

Star Trek: Into Diablo III.

(500) Days of Dragon Age.

Only Lovers Left Alive/Sims 2

Okami/Black Cauldron. 

… um. 

Pokémon X and… Lilo & Stitch, I think?

That’d make the post-Lilo & Stitch plots a LOT more interesting!  Imagine Jumba trying to wrangle all his other experiments together with the use of Pokéballs! XD

Starbound and a porn I do not care to name. So… yeah. The captain is on the bridge (Eyebrow waggle).

Another time, Jack took a call. A voice on the other end said, ‘There are three of us down here in the lobby. We want to see the guy who does this disgusting comic book and show him what real Nazis would do to his Captain America’. To the horror of others in the office, Kirby rolled up his sleeves and headed downstairs. The callers, however, were gone by the time he arrived.

Mark Evanier, Kirby: King of Comics (via nerdhapley)

It’s Jack Kirby’s birthday, so here’s that story of him being bad ass all of the time.

(via nerdhapley)

eridanampervert:

genocidersyooo:

when life gives you lemons what do you do

DONT MAKE LEMONADE

MAKE LIFE TAKE THE LEMONS BACK!

GET MAD!

I DONT WANT YOUR DAMN LEMONS WHAT IM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE?

DEMAND TO SEE LIFES MANAGER. MAKE LIFE RUE THE DAY IT THOUGHT IT COULD GIVE, *CAVE JOHNSON* LEMONS.

DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?!

IM THE MAN WHOS GONNA BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN, WITH THE LEMONS! 

IM GONNA GET MY ENGINEERS TO INVENT A COMBUSTIBLE LEMON THAT’LL BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN.

I get a lot of mileage out of this gif.

atopfourthwall:

therobotmonster:

tank-grrl:

hello-missmayhem:

cptprocrastination:

doomhamster:

belcanta:

nikkidubs:

attentiondeficitaptitude:

belcanta:

Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole. 

Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.
The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.
But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.

"BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?" screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. "You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!""But where will people get the incentive to work?!" Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. "You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”
"But who will serve me?" grumbled Marty McMoneybags. "Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”

I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!

The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)
And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!
Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.
And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.
Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.
And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.
The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?
TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.

reblogging for more top commentary

They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours. 
But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.
Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.

The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.

Assuming society doesn’t collapse in the next 15 years, this is going to become a necessity, due to a number of technologies:
3d Printing - This is getting more and more flexible, inexpensive and impressive. 3d Printing has the potential to completely alter how manufacturing, and thus retail, works. While we’re centuries off from a full on Star Trek style replicator, all manner of minor utility items and luxury goods are already printable. This will heavily alter not just the manufacturing landscape, but the retail landscape as well.
Automation. Those things that are still cheaper to mass produce rather than print will continue to be increasingly produced by robots. This will further erode manufacturing’s position as a major employer. This will also start affecting retail environments and even food service. 
Power. So the retail jobs, food service jobs and manufacturing jobs are all obsolete. At least there’s still value in electricity to run all that, right? Well, while computers compound her computing power solar energy divides its cost per kilowatt-hour. It doesn’t have to be efficient if its cheap enough, and there’s no sign of this trend stopping.
So in the next few decades we can see a potential landscape wherein entire sectors of employment vanish to automation and the power needed to run that automation becomes essentially free. Suddenly we hit a conundrum: can we continue to value people based on their labor when there literally isn’t enough labor to go around? 
This is basically the Star Trek: TNG conundrum. If power can be turned into stuff, and there’s no shortage of power, then stuff has no value. This is the “post-scarcity” economy, which our current economic principles cannot handle. We won’t hit post-scarcity in the next few decades, but we’ll start getting close enough that the cracks in the system will start to show.
Once you hit that point, or even approach it, you have a choice: either people have to be valued as people and given a certain level of comfort and security so that they can pursue their interests and abilities (STTNG), or you have labor-as-value in a world with a vastly decreased need for labor resulting in a massive poverty-class and a small wealthy over-class (Hunger Games). There is a third option, but is a weird sort of ‘make work’ situation, where people are made to do meaningless tasks to ‘earn’ their living despite the tasks being essentially theater to make sure no one gets ‘a free ride’. 
Imagine a hunter-gatherer society where a small fraction of the hunters can feed the whole tribe, but the ones who don’t have to hunt go on pretend-hunts that net no game and do nothing but occupy their time in order to get their share. 
Even if you accept Capitalism as the best answer in a zero-sum economic game it becomes a moral and ethical sinkhole when the economy is no longer zero-sum. At that point the existence of poverty isn’t about an uneven distribution of limited resources. It is about the denial of distribution of nigh-unlimited resources. 

Oooooor, just throwing this out there, manufacturing jobs shift more and more towards the service sector, which they’ve been doing for a while anyway. Manufacturing is not the only type of job out there. Not to dispute the other stuff you’re saying, I’m just saying we need not fear for TNG’s rather bizarre economy or the Hunger Games - just that the employment landscape will continue to change as it has been for a while and we will adapt.

The service sector has the problem that it is both low paying and oversaturated as it is. I think the employment landscape will continue to change, I just think that a large portion of that change is going to be in changing how we think about employment in general. If social stability in the cards, then part of that is going to have to be new ways of thinking about what a person has to do to “deserve” a comfortable living. Decreasing the wage gap back to 60s levels and adjusting the minimum wage to a living wage is a start. 
Outside of difficult-to-predict sci-fi jobs (renting out one’s brainpower for distributed computing, selling memories, soylent green quality tester, blade runner, etc) the landscape is moving toward fewer people doing more work. The world only needs so much labor to function and thinking about what to do when fifty percent of the people provide 100% of the work is worth working out in advance. 
It is a problem, but like the cliche says, that’s also an opportunity. We waste a lot of geniuses through poverty, discrimination and lack of educational opportunity. It would be amazing if every Hawking, Beethoven, Einstein, Hicks, Tesla, Kafka, Leavitt and DeVinci could explore their gifts because they are liberated from subsistence drudgery. 

atopfourthwall:

therobotmonster:

tank-grrl:

hello-missmayhem:

cptprocrastination:

doomhamster:

belcanta:

nikkidubs:

attentiondeficitaptitude:

belcanta:

Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole. 

Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.

The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.

But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.

"BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?" screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. "You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!"

"But where will people get the incentive to work?!" Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. "You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”

"But who will serve me?" grumbled Marty McMoneybags. "Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”

I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!

The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)

And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!

Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.

And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.

Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.

And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.

The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?

TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.

reblogging for more top commentary

They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours. 

But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.

Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.

The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.

Assuming society doesn’t collapse in the next 15 years, this is going to become a necessity, due to a number of technologies:

  • 3d Printing - This is getting more and more flexible, inexpensive and impressive. 3d Printing has the potential to completely alter how manufacturing, and thus retail, works. While we’re centuries off from a full on Star Trek style replicator, all manner of minor utility items and luxury goods are already printable. This will heavily alter not just the manufacturing landscape, but the retail landscape as well.
  • Automation. Those things that are still cheaper to mass produce rather than print will continue to be increasingly produced by robots. This will further erode manufacturing’s position as a major employer. This will also start affecting retail environments and even food service. 
  • Power. So the retail jobs, food service jobs and manufacturing jobs are all obsolete. At least there’s still value in electricity to run all that, right? Well, while computers compound her computing power solar energy divides its cost per kilowatt-hour. It doesn’t have to be efficient if its cheap enough, and there’s no sign of this trend stopping.

So in the next few decades we can see a potential landscape wherein entire sectors of employment vanish to automation and the power needed to run that automation becomes essentially free. Suddenly we hit a conundrum: can we continue to value people based on their labor when there literally isn’t enough labor to go around? 

This is basically the Star Trek: TNG conundrum. If power can be turned into stuff, and there’s no shortage of power, then stuff has no value. This is the “post-scarcity” economy, which our current economic principles cannot handle. We won’t hit post-scarcity in the next few decades, but we’ll start getting close enough that the cracks in the system will start to show.

Once you hit that point, or even approach it, you have a choice: either people have to be valued as people and given a certain level of comfort and security so that they can pursue their interests and abilities (STTNG), or you have labor-as-value in a world with a vastly decreased need for labor resulting in a massive poverty-class and a small wealthy over-class (Hunger Games). There is a third option, but is a weird sort of ‘make work’ situation, where people are made to do meaningless tasks to ‘earn’ their living despite the tasks being essentially theater to make sure no one gets ‘a free ride’. 

Imagine a hunter-gatherer society where a small fraction of the hunters can feed the whole tribe, but the ones who don’t have to hunt go on pretend-hunts that net no game and do nothing but occupy their time in order to get their share. 

Even if you accept Capitalism as the best answer in a zero-sum economic game it becomes a moral and ethical sinkhole when the economy is no longer zero-sum. At that point the existence of poverty isn’t about an uneven distribution of limited resources. It is about the denial of distribution of nigh-unlimited resources. 

Oooooor, just throwing this out there, manufacturing jobs shift more and more towards the service sector, which they’ve been doing for a while anyway. Manufacturing is not the only type of job out there. Not to dispute the other stuff you’re saying, I’m just saying we need not fear for TNG’s rather bizarre economy or the Hunger Games - just that the employment landscape will continue to change as it has been for a while and we will adapt.

The service sector has the problem that it is both low paying and oversaturated as it is. I think the employment landscape will continue to change, I just think that a large portion of that change is going to be in changing how we think about employment in general. If social stability in the cards, then part of that is going to have to be new ways of thinking about what a person has to do to “deserve” a comfortable living. Decreasing the wage gap back to 60s levels and adjusting the minimum wage to a living wage is a start. 

Outside of difficult-to-predict sci-fi jobs (renting out one’s brainpower for distributed computing, selling memories, soylent green quality tester, blade runner, etc) the landscape is moving toward fewer people doing more work. The world only needs so much labor to function and thinking about what to do when fifty percent of the people provide 100% of the work is worth working out in advance. 

It is a problem, but like the cliche says, that’s also an opportunity. We waste a lot of geniuses through poverty, discrimination and lack of educational opportunity. It would be amazing if every Hawking, Beethoven, Einstein, Hicks, Tesla, Kafka, Leavitt and DeVinci could explore their gifts because they are liberated from subsistence drudgery. 

dollsahoy:

nowyoukno:

rasputinstuff:

nowyoukno:

montodebon:

nowyoukno:

Source for more facts follow NowYouKno

The key word here is “radioactive”
Do not drive with radiation a few feet in front of you
Do not drive with radiation a few feet in front of you
Also… Do not drive with radiation a few feet in front of you.
This has been a PSA

The key word here is actually “concept”
This has been a wake up call

If you checked the source for information you’d know the radiation it gives off is incredibly weak. It can be stopped with a single sheet of aluminum foil. So unless the engine’s in the passenger seat, you’ll be fine.

^

Allow me to add a new keyword: Debunked. (tl; dr—That’s a Cadillac art project up there, and it has nothing to do with any bogus laser thorium stuff.)

Thorium is a potentially viable nuclear fuel, but not for cars. At least not directly. However, I’m going to address the “Do not drive with radiation a few feet in front of you” post, since the laser-thorium power cell has been debunked in the above link.
You’re always surrounded by radiation. At all times. It exists naturally in the environment and you yourself are full of natural radioactive compounds. That’s how radioactive carbon dating of deceased organisms works.
When we talk about elements being radioactive, what we’re saying is that the elements are not stable and they will expel subatomic particles (and energy) as they break down into more stable forms. 
Radiation does damage when the particles shoot through a living being’s cells, like subatomic cannonballs, knocking other particles out of place and generally causing damage. Like all matter, living cells are mostly empty space, so depending on the wavelength, radiation can penetrate through the body to cause damage when it does eventually intersect a particle. If a radioactive particle damages part of a DNA molecule this can (but not always will) cause cancer. 
Cancer, likewise, is not magical or mysterious. If any part of a cell is damaged it only affects that one cell, and this is negligible in a large organism. Unless that damage is to the self-replication regulation processes, in which case you get cancer. Radiation sickness is caused when radiation destroys enough cells outright to be dangerous to the organism
Now, here’s why could drive around with a chunk of thorium and be fine, even though it won’t run your car.
Thorium has a very long half-life (4.05 billion years). “But wait!” I hear you say, "doesn’t that mean it will be radioactive for a very long time!?" Yes, but it also means it emits particles very slowly, so there’s fewer cannonballs whizzing around per second of exposure. An isotope with a short half-life pumps out more particles in the same amount of time. So while a shorter half-life isotope will be rendered safe faster, it is more dangerous before that point.
Also, Thorium emits alpha particles. An alpha particle is basically the nucleus of a helium atom (no electrons). Alpha particles have very weak penetration. A few centimeters of air will stop them and they generally can’t penetrate the layer of dead skin we all have on our bodies. 
Because of these two factors, Thorium can be handled safely so long as it isn’t aerisolized or dissolved and then inhaled or consumed. Which is a good thing, since thorium is abundant in the natural environment. If the thorium-laser engine could work, the engine compartment would provide more than adequate shielding, and even if a car accident were to completely dislodge a chunk of the thorium fuel it could be rendered harmless by wrapping it in aluminum foil.

dollsahoy:

nowyoukno:

rasputinstuff:

nowyoukno:

montodebon:

nowyoukno:

Source for more facts follow NowYouKno

The key word here is “radioactive”

Do not drive with radiation a few feet in front of you

Do not drive with radiation a few feet in front of you

Also… Do not drive with radiation a few feet in front of you.

This has been a PSA

The key word here is actually “concept”

This has been a wake up call

If you checked the source for information you’d know the radiation it gives off is incredibly weak. It can be stopped with a single sheet of aluminum foil. So unless the engine’s in the passenger seat, you’ll be fine.

^

Allow me to add a new keyword: Debunked. (tl; dr—That’s a Cadillac art project up there, and it has nothing to do with any bogus laser thorium stuff.)

Thorium is a potentially viable nuclear fuel, but not for cars. At least not directly. However, I’m going to address the “Do not drive with radiation a few feet in front of you” post, since the laser-thorium power cell has been debunked in the above link.

You’re always surrounded by radiation. At all times. It exists naturally in the environment and you yourself are full of natural radioactive compounds. That’s how radioactive carbon dating of deceased organisms works.

When we talk about elements being radioactive, what we’re saying is that the elements are not stable and they will expel subatomic particles (and energy) as they break down into more stable forms. 

Radiation does damage when the particles shoot through a living being’s cells, like subatomic cannonballs, knocking other particles out of place and generally causing damage. Like all matter, living cells are mostly empty space, so depending on the wavelength, radiation can penetrate through the body to cause damage when it does eventually intersect a particle. If a radioactive particle damages part of a DNA molecule this can (but not always will) cause cancer. 

Cancer, likewise, is not magical or mysterious. If any part of a cell is damaged it only affects that one cell, and this is negligible in a large organism. Unless that damage is to the self-replication regulation processes, in which case you get cancer. Radiation sickness is caused when radiation destroys enough cells outright to be dangerous to the organism

Now, here’s why could drive around with a chunk of thorium and be fine, even though it won’t run your car.

Thorium has a very long half-life (4.05 billion years). “But wait!” I hear you say, "doesn’t that mean it will be radioactive for a very long time!?" Yes, but it also means it emits particles very slowly, so there’s fewer cannonballs whizzing around per second of exposure. An isotope with a short half-life pumps out more particles in the same amount of time. So while a shorter half-life isotope will be rendered safe faster, it is more dangerous before that point.

Also, Thorium emits alpha particles. An alpha particle is basically the nucleus of a helium atom (no electrons). Alpha particles have very weak penetration. A few centimeters of air will stop them and they generally can’t penetrate the layer of dead skin we all have on our bodies. 

Because of these two factors, Thorium can be handled safely so long as it isn’t aerisolized or dissolved and then inhaled or consumed. Which is a good thing, since thorium is abundant in the natural environment. If the thorium-laser engine could work, the engine compartment would provide more than adequate shielding, and even if a car accident were to completely dislodge a chunk of the thorium fuel it could be rendered harmless by wrapping it in aluminum foil.

Compassion hurts. When you feel connected to everything, you also feel responsible for everything. And you cannot turn away. Your destiny is bound with the destinies of others. You must either learn to carry the Universe or be crushed by it. You must grow strong enough to love the world, yet empty enough to sit down at the same table with its worst horrors.
Andrew Boyd (via purplebuddhaproject)
christopherjonesart:

uncalar:

Smaug McDuck :) Hope you enjoy :)

The Beagle Boys would be screwed.

You mean the Baggins Boys.

christopherjonesart:

uncalar:

Smaug McDuck :) Hope you enjoy :)

The Beagle Boys would be screwed.

You mean the Baggins Boys.

tank-grrl:

hello-missmayhem:

cptprocrastination:

doomhamster:

belcanta:

nikkidubs:

attentiondeficitaptitude:

belcanta:

Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole. 

Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.
The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.
But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.

"BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?" screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. "You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!""But where will people get the incentive to work?!" Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. "You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”
"But who will serve me?" grumbled Marty McMoneybags. "Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”

I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!

The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)
And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!
Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.
And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.
Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.
And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.
The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?
TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.

reblogging for more top commentary

They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours. 
But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.
Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.

The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.

Assuming society doesn’t collapse in the next 15 years, this is going to become a necessity, due to a number of technologies:
3d Printing - This is getting more and more flexible, inexpensive and impressive. 3d Printing has the potential to completely alter how manufacturing, and thus retail, works. While we’re centuries off from a full on Star Trek style replicator, all manner of minor utility items and luxury goods are already printable. This will heavily alter not just the manufacturing landscape, but the retail landscape as well.
Automation. Those things that are still cheaper to mass produce rather than print will continue to be increasingly produced by robots. This will further erode manufacturing’s position as a major employer. This will also start affecting retail environments and even food service. 
Power. So the retail jobs, food service jobs and manufacturing jobs are all obsolete. At least there’s still value in electricity to run all that, right? Well, while computers compound her computing power solar energy divides its cost per kilowatt-hour. It doesn’t have to be efficient if its cheap enough, and there’s no sign of this trend stopping.
So in the next few decades we can see a potential landscape wherein entire sectors of employment vanish to automation and the power needed to run that automation becomes essentially free. Suddenly we hit a conundrum: can we continue to value people based on their labor when there literally isn’t enough labor to go around? 
This is basically the Star Trek: TNG conundrum. If power can be turned into stuff, and there’s no shortage of power, then stuff has no value. This is the “post-scarcity” economy, which our current economic principles cannot handle. We won’t hit post-scarcity in the next few decades, but we’ll start getting close enough that the cracks in the system will start to show.
Once you hit that point, or even approach it, you have a choice: either people have to be valued as people and given a certain level of comfort and security so that they can pursue their interests and abilities (STTNG), or you have labor-as-value in a world with a vastly decreased need for labor resulting in a massive poverty-class and a small wealthy over-class (Hunger Games). There is a third option, but is a weird sort of ‘make work’ situation, where people are made to do meaningless tasks to ‘earn’ their living despite the tasks being essentially theater to make sure no one gets ‘a free ride’. 
Imagine a hunter-gatherer society where a small fraction of the hunters can feed the whole tribe, but the ones who don’t have to hunt go on pretend-hunts that net no game and do nothing but occupy their time in order to get their share. 
Even if you accept Capitalism as the best answer in a zero-sum economic game it becomes a moral and ethical sinkhole when the economy is no longer zero-sum. At that point the existence of poverty isn’t about an uneven distribution of limited resources. It is about the denial of distribution of nigh-unlimited resources. 

tank-grrl:

hello-missmayhem:

cptprocrastination:

doomhamster:

belcanta:

nikkidubs:

attentiondeficitaptitude:

belcanta:

Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole. 

Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.

The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.

But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.

"BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?" screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. "You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!"

"But where will people get the incentive to work?!" Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. "You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”

"But who will serve me?" grumbled Marty McMoneybags. "Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”

I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!

The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)

And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!

Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.

And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.

Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.

And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.

The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?

TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.

reblogging for more top commentary

They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours. 

But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.

Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.

The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.

Assuming society doesn’t collapse in the next 15 years, this is going to become a necessity, due to a number of technologies:

  • 3d Printing - This is getting more and more flexible, inexpensive and impressive. 3d Printing has the potential to completely alter how manufacturing, and thus retail, works. While we’re centuries off from a full on Star Trek style replicator, all manner of minor utility items and luxury goods are already printable. This will heavily alter not just the manufacturing landscape, but the retail landscape as well.
  • Automation. Those things that are still cheaper to mass produce rather than print will continue to be increasingly produced by robots. This will further erode manufacturing’s position as a major employer. This will also start affecting retail environments and even food service. 
  • Power. So the retail jobs, food service jobs and manufacturing jobs are all obsolete. At least there’s still value in electricity to run all that, right? Well, while computers compound her computing power solar energy divides its cost per kilowatt-hour. It doesn’t have to be efficient if its cheap enough, and there’s no sign of this trend stopping.

So in the next few decades we can see a potential landscape wherein entire sectors of employment vanish to automation and the power needed to run that automation becomes essentially free. Suddenly we hit a conundrum: can we continue to value people based on their labor when there literally isn’t enough labor to go around? 

This is basically the Star Trek: TNG conundrum. If power can be turned into stuff, and there’s no shortage of power, then stuff has no value. This is the “post-scarcity” economy, which our current economic principles cannot handle. We won’t hit post-scarcity in the next few decades, but we’ll start getting close enough that the cracks in the system will start to show.

Once you hit that point, or even approach it, you have a choice: either people have to be valued as people and given a certain level of comfort and security so that they can pursue their interests and abilities (STTNG), or you have labor-as-value in a world with a vastly decreased need for labor resulting in a massive poverty-class and a small wealthy over-class (Hunger Games). There is a third option, but is a weird sort of ‘make work’ situation, where people are made to do meaningless tasks to ‘earn’ their living despite the tasks being essentially theater to make sure no one gets ‘a free ride’. 

Imagine a hunter-gatherer society where a small fraction of the hunters can feed the whole tribe, but the ones who don’t have to hunt go on pretend-hunts that net no game and do nothing but occupy their time in order to get their share. 

Even if you accept Capitalism as the best answer in a zero-sum economic game it becomes a moral and ethical sinkhole when the economy is no longer zero-sum. At that point the existence of poverty isn’t about an uneven distribution of limited resources. It is about the denial of distribution of nigh-unlimited resources. 

I remember the days when games were about worlds you could explore and about being good, and not about who's got representation and gender this and sexuality that. I miss those days.
Anonymous

dgaider:

Those days miss you, too. I recently found a yellowed letter under one of the floorboards, and it was addressed to you and signed by those days with a tear-stained kiss of lipstick.

Meanwhile, in the present, those of us who work in the industry and who are—amazingly—able to consider more than one idea at the same time, will continue to create good games about worlds you can explore AND occasionally talk about inclusivity.

If you are feeling compassion fatigue, I think it might be okay to sit out those discussions, at least until you get your strength back. While it will be tough not having you available for close consultation, somehow we will soldier on.

You can’t get much more world-explore-y than modern Bethesda games and, while not perfect, they do pretty well on the representation end of things. Like dgaider says, these are not mutually exclusive elements. 

vancity604778kid:

ultrafacts:

Source For more facts, Follow Ultrafacts

calamityjon:

bzedan:

vsw:

Spirit Rapping Unveiled: An expose of the origin, history, theology and philosophy of certain alleged communications from the spiritworld, by means of “spirit rapping,” “medium writing,” “physical demonstrations,” etc. by Rev. Hiram Mattison, 1855

from the Visual Studies Workshop Books and Periodicals Archive

vsw.org

Not the rapping I expected.

"My name’s Ghosty Ghost and I’m here to say /
I’m gonna rap in a spooky way /
I rap to the East / I rap to the West
And everyone says my rap is the best /
Now go BOO (BOO)
Now go BOO (BOO)
Now go BOO BOO BOO  (BOO BOO BOO)
Now go BOO  (BOO)
Ghost rap!”

I am super-disappointed that the book isn’t a page long with the following content:

1) Pop your knuckles or toes loudly. If you can’t do that, subtly knock on the table with your heel, knee or elbow while your hands are visible.

2) Deliver some spooky patter, warm read if you can, cold read if you can’t.

3) Exchange this performance for money from wealthy, bored rubes.

4) If Houdini comes to town, leave.

5) Repeat steps 1-4 until wealthy.