best when viewed in low light


Searching for: wool skull cap

I can't decide if this is a "win" or an epic fraking "fail"?


This one definitely gets the thumbs up


In the crates: Twilites carry cash

Ah, Twilight.

If I were a professor of media studies, I would write a book about your conflicted agenda.

Really stEphEniE mEyEr, are you trying to demonstrate how much teen girls think about sex, and celebrate their exploration? Or are you telling them to keep it tight until they find The One and become instantly impregnated?

I don't know if you know.

In the meanwhile, young girls think about/want sex as much as boys do (sorry, Mr. Ev Psych, you're just wrong about that). And they're willing to pay for it...or something.

What TIME said:


SHY, you are such a badass

Sometimes people are so awesome they demand a quote.

In this case, it is my redoubtable, brilliant, accomplished and ancient grandmother, Sarah.

In an attempt to summarize the endless doctor visits, energetic decline and disproportionate pain of 90+ years on the planet, she says:

"Old age is not for sissies."

Grammy, I fraking love you.

I can't believe this is real: Steampunk Palin

[The only appropriate caption for this is, of course, "Lick me! All of you!" A quote not lightly stolen from Parker Posey's absolutely brilliant bitch Darla, from Dazed and Confused.]

What this is really about, of course, is the NEW feminist, libertarian comic book all us gals can look up to: Steampunk Palin.

As you may notice from this very helpful review, it's serious/spoof quotient is almost impossible to detect.

Given the other titles offered by Antarctic Press, I'm gonna go with: totally fraking serious.

"Western" Miyamoto

Now we know where those cursed desert levels in Super Mario 2 came from...

[via SuMe]

"Let’s just chew this over for a minute. Saxophone Mario shirt, thematically-appropriate denim western stage-show jacket, ornate belt, and platform cowboy boots."


Surreality loop: Wikipedia's "common misconceptions"

And this is only TWO of them!

"- George Washington Carver did not invent peanut butter, though he reputedly discovered three hundred uses for peanuts and hundreds more for soybeans, pecans, and sweet potatoes.[235][236]
- Thomas Crapper did not invent the flush toilet;[237] it was invented by Sir John Harrington in 1596. Crapper, however, did much to increase its popularity and came up with some related inventions, such as the ballcock mechanism used to fill toilet tanks. He was noted for the quality of his products and received several Royal Warrants. He was not the origin of the word crap, but his name may have helped popularize it."

From Wikipedia's "List of common misconceptions"


Kids today: So innovative they don't even know it


2011 Lemelson-MIT Invention Index Uncovers Inventive Perception among Young Americans

Cambridge, Mass., January 19, 2011 –Invention and innovation are essential to remaining globally competitive, and a new survey shows an untapped group of potential inventors in the U.S. The 2011 Lemelson-MIT Invention Index1, announced today, indicates that American women ages 16 – 25 possess many characteristics necessary to become inventors, such as creativity, interest in science and math, desire to develop altruistic inventions, and preference for working in groups or with mentors – yet they still do not see themselves as inventive. Young men in the same age group echo these characteristics, highlighting the need to cultivate young adults’ interest in science and math, while educating and inspiring them about the impact they can have on others through invention.

Embracing Young Adults’ Inventive Skills

The annual Lemelson-MIT Invention Index, which gauges Americans’ perceptions about invention and innovation, this year surveyed young men and women ages 16 – 25. Almost three in four young women (71 percent) indicate they are creative, the characteristic they most associate with inventors (63 percent); however, less than one in three (27 percent) describe themselves as inventive. Men also follow this trend; 66 percent say they are creative but only 39 percent describe themselves as inventive.

Further demonstrating inventive traits, young women show a strong affinity for math and science – two of every five female respondents (42 percent) rate these as their favorite subjects in school. More than half of male respondents (53 percent) agree. 35 percent of young women also say they have a family member working in a field related to science, technology, math or engineering. The results reveal young women’s innate interest in inventive fields; however, recent statistics show while more women are entering college and obtaining degrees, less than ten percent earn them in technical majors such as computer and information sciences, engineering or math.2 This proportionately small group indicates a need to educate women about translating their skills and academic interests into inventive careers.

Chad Mirkin, a member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and 2009 recipient of the $500,000 Lemelson-MIT Prize, recently remarked, “This country needs innovative new programs to stimulate the interest of young men and women in STEM and to challenge them to use their intellect and creativity to invent solutions to some of the world's most pressing problems. Women have an enormous amount to offer in this regard, but aren’t currently pursuing science or technology fields at a high enough rate.”

Fueling Future Innovation

The Lemelson-MIT Invention Index also reveals that young women and men do not see the U.S. as leading the way in invention; 61 percent of young women view Japan as the leader, with the U.S. ranking second at 27 percent. Young men agree, choosing Japan first (54 percent) and the U.S. second (36 percent).

To improve the U.S. standing, young women cite access to governmental funding (30 percent) and including invention projects during school (36 percent) as the best ways to encourage aspiring inventors. They cite lack of knowledge and concern about funding (65 percent) as the most challenging obstacles. Men agree, noting that providing places to develop inventions (24 percent) is another way to encourage hopeful inventors. The availability of invention tools and education has the potential to boost the quantity of inventive professionals, according to survey respondents.

Joshua Schuler, executive director of the Lemelson-MIT Program, supports this idea. “Our Lemelson-MIT InvenTeam grants initiative and partnerships with national youth organizations, which have access to millions of young people, inspire and empower youth to invent. To highlight a potential path to success, we also recognize award-winning college and professional innovators as accessible role models. We encourage parents, teachers and leaders at the state and national level to do their part and embrace innovation and seek out invention education experiences for youth.

Inventing for a Cause

The Lemelson-MIT Invention Index results indicate that young people have the skills necessary to invent, and also reveal that nearly half (49 percent) of young women are most interested in pursuing invention to improve the lives of others. Almost two in five men are also motivated to invent to improve lives (38 percent). 58 percent of the female respondents would make a health science or consumer product invention their top priority; men’s inventive interest is geared towards consumer products or web-based inventions (54 percent).

Other Interesting Survey Findings

* 39 percent of men and 36 percent of women think that inventors are people who most often work at home or in their garage, illustrating a misperception of inventors and their careers.
* Young adults show a preference for working in groups or with mentors (73 percent), the style typically associated with professionals in technical fields.
* Young women are most interested in thinking of and designing a solution (57 percent) when it comes to the inventive process; men are also interested in those steps, as well as building the solution (84 percent).

The Lemelson-MIT Program recognizes the outstanding inventors and innovators transforming our world, and inspires young people to pursue creative lives and careers through innovation.

Jerome H. Lemelson, one of U.S. history’s most prolific inventors, and his wife Dorothy founded the Lemelson-MIT Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1994. It is funded by The Lemelson Foundation and administered by the School of Engineering. The Foundation sparks, sustains and celebrates innovation and the inventive spirit. It supports projects in the U.S. and developing countries that nurture innovators and unleash invention to advance economic, social and environmentally sustainable development. To date The Lemelson Foundation has donated or committed more than U.S. $150 million in support of its mission. For more information about the Lemelson-MIT Program, visit

1The 2011 Lemelson-MIT Invention Index survey was conducted by Opinion Research Corporation December 14-20, 2010, using an internet-based, multiple-choice format. The sample size of 1,000 respondents, ages 16-25, at the 95 percent confidence level would equate to + or – 3.2 percent margin of error had this been a random sample. * Please refer to the survey as the Lemelson-MIT Invention Index.

2U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 2008-09 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), Fall 2009.

Little Dragon live

So good the back of my neck tingled after the show...musta been my brain on that violent/sexy/emphatic/spastic/fantastic music.

Not to mention the sensory overload of billygoat

Dioscuri Part II from Billygoat on Vimeo.

And the nearly overwhelming enthusiasm of Theophilus London


HBR: Holistic capitalism is not your idea!

Listen, HBR, as awesome as you are, you are always like 10 years behind innovative thinking.

So when I read your articles, or watch your videos, I am always thinking to myself: "Duh! Thanks for pointing out the obvious."

In this particular line of thought - the idea that capitalism is a malleable system, to which no values are permanently affixed, and which can, therefore, be adapted to suit any set of political, environmental, or social parameters/beliefs/values - you are SO far behind that I can only see rage.

And here's why: The non-Harvard people that already thought of this are outsiders - in the fields of economics, philosophy, political science, sociology - and, because of this, do not get the same credibility or authority attached to their equally brilliant (and vastly more forward-thinking) approach.

Frustrating as this is, of course, I have to give you props: Without you, no one will EVER believe it's all possible.

Put an old white dude in front of a camera, though, and suddenly humanitarian capitalism isn't a unicorn any more.

iPorn: Apple's (understandable, but still) hypocrisy

I have a hard time swallowing Apple's anti-pornography restrictions - even though I understand why, as a global corporation, they would make that choice.

But I think back to the philosophy that lead "Apple" to adopt its knowledge-of-the-forbidden-fruit iconography and brand identity, and I wonder why they would choose such a Puritanical and frigid policy with their (okay, so they're not exactly "warm and fuzzy", but they are very) personal computers.

As in all cases where profit overwhelms every other value, I call bullshit on you, Apple.

Plus, iWanna iPleasemyselfwithmy iPad. Who doesn't?

Playboy to Offer Uncensored Version on iPad

Jan 19, 2011

-By Lucia Moses

Hugh Hefner caused a flurry of confusion today when he tweeted that Playboy would be available in uncensored form on the iPad. The tweet led some observers to wonder how Playboy was pulling this off, given Apple’s ban on nudity in the iTunes store.

So how is Playboy skirting the ban? The subscription service to past and present issues that Playboy is planning will be accessed through the Web (Apple hasn’t figured out a way to restrict that yet), not the iTunes store, where Apple has been strict—if not always consistent—about allowing adult content. Playboy said the service, set to be released in March, will be available via browsers and will be iPad-compatible.

As for the iTunes store, Playboy has an app in the works that will contain no nudity, in keeping with Apple’s rules, that it plans to release in the coming months. It currently sells a no-nudity preview of the current issue on the iPhone.

“Apple’s very strict,” a rep for the magazine said. “Our app doesn’t have any nudity in it.”


Kids today: I am your competition

Game design is not complicated.

There is a limited and universal collection of rule sets - some of which can be adapted, synthesized, or re-scoped - from which all games are derived.

And programs like Flash, the Game Salad app, or the ipad SDK open the doors to anyone with the time, imagination, and follow-through to build.

Fourteen seems like the right age, really.

This is also a good place to say the following: Kids can do a lot more than we, the "grown ups", act like they can. Imagine who we could become if we let them do what they want?

Teen's Bubble Ball game tops iTunes free app chart

Page last updated at 11:25 GMT, Wednesday, 19 January 2011

A game designed by a 14-year-old boy has topped the iTunes worldwide free app charts, ahead of the likes of Facebook and Skype.

Robert Nay, from Utah in the USA, created Bubble Ball, a "physics puzzle game" for Apple devices.

He learned how to code the game from a library book, after a friend's dad suggested he try to make an app.

On Wednesday (19 January), Bubble Ball had been downloaded two million times, according to Robert's figures.

It was also ahead of the free version of hit game Angry Birds.

"I think it's pretty cool because I never thought my game would do that well," Robert told ABC News.

"My friend's dad suggested I try making an iPhone app and I thought, 'Why not, that'd be pretty cool,' so I checked out a book from the library.

"When I saw that it was number one for the free apps, I was astonished."

He also says he plans to make more games, but his next project is "a secret".

Almost like being there?

According to the following article on Bloomberg, there is some possibility that the imminent royal nuptials will be filmed in 3D and broadcast - live [! (?)] - to movie theaters around the world.


Then again, well played, Mr. Murdoch. I hear people actually give a shit about this.

But y'know what I'd like to see? Charles opt out of the kingship, and a couple years after the wedding - say, around William's 35th birthday - he and Old Lady Liz pass on the throne to the sexy new couple. "Cool Britannia" that, PR agents!

Prince William's Fans May View Royal Wedding Through Murdoch 3-D Glasses
By Kristen Schweizer - Jan 18, 2011

When Prince William and Kate Middleton exchange vows in Westminster Abbey on April 29, some royal watchers may be tearing up from behind 3-D glasses.

British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc, controlled by Rupert Murdoch, is negotiating with royal officials to show the wedding on television. The talks, which involve the British Broadcasting Corp., also include shooting the event in 3-D and transmitting it to cinemas, two people familiar with the matter said. Test shots have been taken inside the church and a broadcast rights announcement may come in weeks, one of them said, declining to be identified because the talks are private.

The 3-D plan may draw interest from cinema chains around the world, with Cineworld Group Plc and Vue Entertainment Ltd. lining up to screen the event in the U.K. The government has declared the wedding day a public holiday, cleared pubs to stay open until 1 a.m. and said it will allow road closures so people can hold street parties to celebrate.

“Royal weddings like this only happen every 30 to 50 years,” Vue Entertainment Chief Executive Officer Tim Richards said in an interview. “It’s a major event and will have huge demand globally.” Vue has about 700 movie screens.

The engagement of William -- son of Prince Charles and the late Diana, Princess of Wales -- was announced on Nov. 16. William, 28 and second in line to the throne, has been dating Middleton, 29, since 2003.

1981 Spectacle

It isn’t clear if broadcasters will have to pay to show the wedding, a state event.

The cost of rights for popular events can be high. FIFA, soccer’s governing body, took in $1.9 billion from the sale of World Cup TV rights last year. Networks paid more than $5 million for rights to show events surrounding President Barack Obama’s inauguration. Monaco is asking about 400,000 euros ($532,400) for the July nuptials of Prince Albert and Charlene Wittstock, French magazine Le Point said last month.

The marriage of Prince Charles and Diana before 3,500 guests at St. Paul’s Cathedral in 1981 attracted a global TV audience of 750 million, making it the most popular program ever broadcast, according to the BBC.

Queen Elizabeth II’s 1953 coronation gave many people an excuse to buy their first TV sets. A three-dimensional broadcast of the April wedding may boost the sale of 3-D sets.

Prince Charles’s website says Prince William and Kate Middleton will travel in a glass carriage from Westminster Abbey to Buckingham Palace, where the queen will host a reception followed by a private dinner and dancing.

3-D Push

“There would be real demand for the wedding in 3-D but only if it’s the full ceremony, including scenes before and the carriage procession,” Rupert Gavin, chief executive officer at Odeon & UCI Cinemas Group, the U.K.’s largest cinema chain.

Movie theatres have benefited from the explosion of 3-D screenings -- and their higher ticket prices -- and by showing live events such as the Metropolitan Opera, the soccer World Cup and concerts by the Black Eyed Peas and U2.

Blockbuster films “Avatar,” “Tron: Legacy” and “Toy Story 3” prompted cinemas to outfit screens with digital equipment, which also lets them stream live content.

Non-movie content, while still only single-digit revenue for many cinema owners, totalled 200 million pounds ($318 million) globally in 2010 compared with 30 billion pounds of total revenue at the box office, said David Hancock, head of the cinema market at researcher Screen Digest in London.

‘Everything Around’

“What works best is the screening of events with restricted access like concerts or opera or an event with a competitive edge like the Olympics,” he said. He doubts the royal wedding will generate enough demand to fill cinemas.

Once broadcast rights for the wedding are agreed on, the filming and transmission of footage can be arranged quickly, Vue’s Richards said, since satellite dishes are already in place around the globe.

Other details include whether there will be live filming before and after the wedding and whether behind-the-scenes shots will be allowed, as well as admission fees for cinemas, he said. A corporate sponsor could make the event free to the public, like the Royal Bank of Scotland’s sponsorship of live Rugby World Cup transmissions in cinemas last year.

Cinemas would negotiate with the winner of the rights to stream the event, paying a percentage of the admission fee, said Stephen Wiener, chief executive officer at Cineworld, which has more than 780 movie screens in the U.K.

“Demand depends on the event; that’s the draw,” he said. “With the royal wedding, we’d definitely show it in cinemas. And not just the wedding but everything around it.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Kristen Schweizer in London at

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Vidya Root at


Searching for: pile of rust

Rawr! Mario crush you mushrooms and turtle shells!


Searching for: sailboat shroud

The raddest tree house ever.

[Yes, I am bringing "rad" back.]

Even cuter in winter


Someday this will go through my hand

But until then, it'll be the raddest knife I own:

I'd like to welcome my new RADA Cutlery Cook's Knife with a ten-fingered round of applause...while I still can.

I can't effuse enough about this. It is SHARP. It is beautiful and weighty in just the right way, and it's made rycheer in the YOOESSUVAY!

Station without advertising

I felt the calm immediately when arrived in the station...there was something loud and obnoxious missing from my sensory wasn't the rank pee in the corner, that was still wasn't the scampering and crinkling of trash collecting rats on the tracks, that was as fascinating as usual...

and then, there it wasn't:


Let's hope so

Is there a genius in all of us?

BBC News Magazine

12 January 2011 Last updated at 20:36 ET

“It would be folly to suggest that anyone can literally do or become anything. But the new science tells us that it's equally foolish to think that mediocrity is built into most of us”

Those who think geniuses are born and not made should think again, says author David Shenk.

Where do athletic and artistic abilities come from? With phrases like "gifted musician", "natural athlete" and "innate intelligence", we have long assumed that talent is a genetic thing some of us have and others don't.

But new science suggests the source of abilities is much more interesting and improvisational. It turns out that everything we are is a developmental process and this includes what we get from our genes.

A century ago, geneticists saw genes as robot actors, always uttering the same lines in exactly the same way, and much of the public is still stuck with this old idea. In recent years, though, scientists have seen a dramatic upgrade in their understanding of heredity.

They now know that genes interact with their surroundings, getting turned on and off all the time. In effect, the same genes have different effects depending on who they are talking to.


"There are no genetic factors that can be studied independently of the environment," says Michael Meaney, a professor at McGill University in Canada.

"And there are no environmental factors that function independently of the genome. [A trait] emerges only from the interaction of gene and environment."

This means that everything about us - our personalities, our intelligence, our abilities - are actually determined by the lives we lead. The very notion of "innate" no longer holds together.

"In each case the individual animal starts its life with the capacity to develop in a number of distinctly different ways," says Patrick Bateson, a biologist at Cambridge University.

"The individual animal starts its life with the capacity to develop in a number of distinctly different ways. Like a jukebox, the individual has the potential to play a number of different developmental tunes. The particular developmental tune it does play is selected by [the environment] in which the individual is growing up."

Is it that genes don't matter? Of course not. We're all different and have different theoretical potentials from one another. There was never any chance of me being Cristiano Ronaldo. Only tiny Cristiano Ronaldo had a chance of being the Cristiano Ronaldo we know now.

But we also have to understand that he could have turned out to be quite a different person, with different abilities. His future football magnificence was not carved in genetic stone.


This new developmental paradigm is a big idea to swallow, considering how much effort has gone into persuading us that each of us inherits a fixed amount of intelligence, and that most of us are doomed to be mediocre.

The notion of a fixed IQ has been with us for almost a century. Yet the original inventor of the IQ test, Alfred Binet, had quite the opposite opinion, and the science turns out to favour Binet.

"Intelligence represents a set of competencies in development," said Robert Sternberg from Tufts University in the US in 2005, after many decades of study.

Talent researchers Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Kevin Rathunde and Samuel Whalen agree.

"High academic achievers are not necessarily born 'smarter' than others," they write in their book Talented Teenagers, "but work harder and develop more self-discipline."

James Flynn of the University of Otago in New Zealand has documented how IQ scores themselves have steadily risen over the century - which, after careful analysis, he ascribes to increased cultural sophistication. In other words, we've all gotten smarter as our culture has sharpened us.

Most profoundly, Carol Dweck from Stanford University in the US, has demonstrated that students who understand intelligence is malleable rather than fixed are much more intellectually ambitious and successful.

The same dynamic applies to talent. This explains why today's top runners, swimmers, bicyclists, chess players, violinists and on and on, are so much more skilful than in previous generations.

All of these abilities are dependent on a slow, incremental process which various micro-cultures have figured out how to improve. Until recently, the nature of this improvement was merely intuitive and all but invisible to scientists and other observers.

Soft and sculptable

But in recent years, a whole new field of "expertise studies", led by Florida State University psychologist Anders Ericsson, has emerged which is cleverly documenting the sources and methods of such tiny, incremental improvements.
Cristiano Ronaldo Born to be a footballer?

Bit by bit, they're gathering a better and better understanding of how different attitudes, teaching styles and precise types of practice and exercise push people along very different pathways.

Does your child have the potential to develop into a world-class athlete, a virtuoso musician, or a brilliant Nobel-winning scientist?

It would be folly to suggest that anyone can literally do or become anything. But the new science tells us that it's equally foolish to think that mediocrity is built into most of us, or that any of us can know our true limits before we've applied enormous resources and invested vast amounts of time.

Our abilities are not set in genetic stone. They are soft and sculptable, far into adulthood. With humility, with hope, and with extraordinary determination, greatness is something to which any kid - of any age - can aspire.


Linz Luv

That's my girl!


The Only Fantasy Story Ever Told

There was a war. The Good Head of State was captured by the Bad Head of State.

The Third Side invaded the Bad Side's city, which was already surrounded by the Good Side. All Sides engaged in a vicious battle, the Good Side winning but suffering lots of losses. The Third Side retreated, along with POWs from the Good & Bad Sides.

Now the True Head of State has been reinstated because the Bad Head of State was captured by the Third Side.

The Good Side and Bad Side were reconciled, and the True Head of State joined forces with Our Hero. With their powers combined, they engaged the Forces of Evil in The Last Battle.

After the massacre, Our Hero dies, bringing Salvation to The World.


TRON suit

This is the kind of enthusiasm marketers dream of...why didn't they crowd source this design during the movie's production?

[Another one to file under "I make your good ideas even better"]


I'm coming out Republican

On the day that the Republican-majority Congress of 2011 takes over, I'd like to declare myself.

I am a registered Republican.

I am a believer in Republican values: small federal government, strong state-level regulation, economic freedom, limited governmental intrusion in individual life choices...

The funny thing is, I haven't seen a Republican who acts on those values in my 33 years on this planet.

I'm looking for a philosophical revolution in the Republican party. I can't be the only one. And I do not believe that the loudest voices - which represent archaic, pseudo-traditionalist worldviews - are the most representative.


How has the "small federal government" party created Homeland Security?

How did the "strong state-level regulation" philosophy birth No Child Left Behind?

How did "economic freedom" translate into nationalizing and subsidizing failing corporations?

How does "limited governmental intrusion in individual life choices" become anti-gay marriage or DADT?

These are not the policies of a conservative philosophy.


Joshua Abelow: New York

New York

It's hard to live
in a shopping mall.

They ask me when I'm coming back.

Some day soon I guess
but only because
cute girls like
to shop

- Joshua Abelow

In the past...