Monday, May 20, 2013
[Image: Screencap of a tweet by me that reads, “Once upon this same earth, beneath this same sun—long before you, before the ape and the elephant, as well…in the time when OSX was stable”]

[Image: Screencap of a tweet by me that reads, “Once upon this same earth, beneath this same sun—long before you, before the ape and the elephant, as well…in the time when OSX was stable”]

Re: The internet is forlorn

ericainchoate said: I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE.

No it’s not what you think I’m not into that really someone else must’ve been using my browser—OH, right. You mean the pun. Phew.

The internet is forlorn.

If you claim to be apolitical, that means you probably just internalized your parents’ politics. Wise words from a former teacher
Sunday, May 19, 2013

biyuti:

amydentata:

biyuti:

nepetaquest:

arguments that should be used against Yahoo buying out Tumblr:

  • their initial offer is too low
  • possible unnecessary ad space
  • stricter regulations

arguments that should not be used against Yahoo buying out Tumblr:

  • “TUMBLR IS MEANT FOR OUTCASTS AND WEIRDOS ONLY”
  • “NO ONE ELSE IS ALLOWED TO TOUCH OUR SACRED GROUND”
  • “FANDOMS UNITE AGAINST FACEBOOKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

er….

or how about their terrible history with ruining the startups they acquire?

(see geocities, delicious, flickr,)

What is one thing Yahoo has done successfully? Not a rhetorical question. I’d like to know, if anyone has an answer.

Um. The one thing they’ve done good is create a useful homepage that many people continue to visit. Particularly for their news aggregation, which, yeah, super weird to think about but a lot of people use yahoo for news.

I had no idea. Fascinating.

“Oh Yahoo-sempai, you finally noticed me!”

(tweet)

biyuti:

nepetaquest:

arguments that should be used against Yahoo buying out Tumblr:

  • their initial offer is too low
  • possible unnecessary ad space
  • stricter regulations

arguments that should not be used against Yahoo buying out Tumblr:

  • “TUMBLR IS MEANT FOR OUTCASTS AND WEIRDOS ONLY”
  • “NO ONE ELSE IS ALLOWED TO TOUCH OUR SACRED GROUND”
  • “FANDOMS UNITE AGAINST FACEBOOKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

er….

or how about their terrible history with ruining the startups they acquire?

(see geocities, delicious, flickr,)

What is one thing Yahoo has done successfully? Not a rhetorical question. I’d like to know, if anyone has an answer.

faketransgirl:

zuky:

thesmithian:


…[some] may not remember what made Iran-Contra such an extraordinary scandal. The Reagan administration “raised money privately” by selling weapons to a sworn enemy of the United States. Why? Because it wanted to fund an illegal war in Nicaragua. And when I say “illegal war,” I mean that quite literally—Congress told the Reagan administration, in no uncertain terms, that Reagan could not send money to the Contras. Period. The Reagan administration, unrestrained by laws and the Constitution, did so anyway, and much of the president’s national security team ended up under indictment.

more.

Reagan knew everything. However, I bet this Time magazine piece doesn’t get into the juiciest part of Iran-Contra, which is that in the 1980s the CIA put into operation a crack cocaine pipeline to import narcotics from Central and South America and distribute it in US inner cities. This is not a “conspiracy theory”, this is a documented conspiracy, most rigorously researched and reported by Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Gary Webb, whose series in the San Jose Mercury News and subsequent book “Dark Alliance” literally got him killed. To me, that’s the story of Iran-Contra: not that Reagan sold weapons to Iran, but that the US government imported and sold crack to Black America, as part of an arms and drugs trade which funded war in the Third World and which devastated lives and filled prisons in the USA.

o_o

faketransgirl:

zuky:

thesmithian:

…[some] may not remember what made Iran-Contra such an extraordinary scandal. The Reagan administration “raised money privately” by selling weapons to a sworn enemy of the United States. Why? Because it wanted to fund an illegal war in Nicaragua. And when I say “illegal war,” I mean that quite literally—Congress told the Reagan administration, in no uncertain terms, that Reagan could not send money to the Contras. Period. The Reagan administration, unrestrained by laws and the Constitution, did so anyway, and much of the president’s national security team ended up under indictment.

more.

Reagan knew everything. However, I bet this Time magazine piece doesn’t get into the juiciest part of Iran-Contra, which is that in the 1980s the CIA put into operation a crack cocaine pipeline to import narcotics from Central and South America and distribute it in US inner cities. This is not a “conspiracy theory”, this is a documented conspiracy, most rigorously researched and reported by Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Gary Webb, whose series in the San Jose Mercury News and subsequent book “Dark Alliance” literally got him killed. To me, that’s the story of Iran-Contra: not that Reagan sold weapons to Iran, but that the US government imported and sold crack to Black America, as part of an arms and drugs trade which funded war in the Third World and which devastated lives and filled prisons in the USA.

o_o

Saturday, May 18, 2013
Considering how some transphobes behave, I’m starting to think gender is an anti-social construct