The Tumblr I joined in 2009 is no longer in existence. I get that NSFW content attracted pornbots and dodgy links, but this new draconian policy doesn’t chime with the Tumblr I joined almost a decade ago. So as my travels to the site have diminished from every day to maybe once every couple of weeks, I’m pretty safe in assuming Tumblr is no longer the powerful tool in my social media arsenal. So I’m not going to regret finishing with Tumblr and saying goodbye for good. I will no longer post on a site that has sacrificed its principles on freedom of speech and freedom of expression, in such an abject way. Whatever Tumblr becomes from hereon in, I won’t be part of it.
Losing NSFW content was not the only deal breaker. The platform has become clunky and much harder to navigate. I won’t delete my Tumblr forever, but I will not be posting any fresh content. Tumblr was fun once, but I get more satisfaction from other social media platforms. I’m just one guy with a small number of followers, and my decision alone won’t be hitting Tumblr very hard, but I strongly suspect that others like me will be thinking hard about their Tumblr futures and deciding the game ain’t worth the candle anymore.
Thanks for the memories. I met some awesome people through this platform. I’ll miss you all.
Since its founding in 2007, Tumblr has always been a place for wide open, creative self-expression at the heart of community and culture. To borrow from our founder David Karp, we’re proud to have inspired a generation of artists, writers, creators, curators, and crusaders to redefine our culture and to help empower individuality.
Over the past several months, and inspired by our storied past, we’ve given serious thought to who we want to be to our community moving forward and have been hard at work laying the foundation for a better Tumblr. We’ve realized that in order to continue to fulfill our promise and place in culture, especially as it evolves, we must change. Some of that change began with fostering more constructive dialogue among our community members. Today, we’re taking another step by no longer allowing adult content, including explicit sexual content and nudity (with some exceptions).
Let’s first be unequivocal about something that should not be confused with today’s policy change: posting anything that is harmful to minors, including child pornography, is abhorrent and has no place in our community. We’ve always had and always will have a zero tolerance policy for this type of content. To this end, we continuously invest in the enforcement of this policy, including industry-standard machine monitoring, a growing team of human moderators, and user tools that make it easy to report abuse. We also closely partner with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and the Internet Watch Foundation, two invaluable organizations at the forefront of protecting our children from abuse, and through these partnerships we report violations of this policy to law enforcement authorities. We can never prevent all bad actors from attempting to abuse our platform, but we make it our highest priority to keep the community as safe as possible.
So what is changing?
Posts that contain adult content will no longer be allowed on Tumblr, and we’ve updated our Community Guidelines to reflect this policy change. We recognize Tumblr is also a place to speak freely about topics like art, sex positivity, your relationships, your sexuality, and your personal journey. We want to make sure that we continue to foster this type of diversity of expression in the community, so our new policy strives to strike a balance.
Why are we doing this?
It is our continued, humble aspiration that Tumblr be a safe place for creative expression, self-discovery, and a deep sense of community. As Tumblr continues to grow and evolve, and our understanding of our impact on our world becomes clearer, we have a responsibility to consider that impact across different age groups, demographics, cultures, and mindsets. We spent considerable time weighing the pros and cons of expression in the community that includes adult content. In doing so, it became clear that without this content we have the opportunity to create a place where more people feel comfortable expressing themselves.
Bottom line: There are no shortage of sites on the internet that feature adult content. We will leave it to them and focus our efforts on creating the most welcoming environment possible for our community.
So what’s next?
Starting December 17, 2018, we will begin enforcing this new policy. Community members with content that is no longer permitted on Tumblr will get a heads up from us in advance and steps they can take to appeal or preserve their content outside the community if they so choose. All changes won’t happen overnight as something of this complexity takes time.
Another thing, filtering this type of content versus say, a political protest with nudity or the statue of David, is not simple at scale. We’re relying on automated tools to identify adult content and humans to help train and keep our systems in check. We know there will be mistakes, but we’ve done our best to create and enforce a policy that acknowledges the breadth of expression we see in the community.
Most importantly, we’re going to be as transparent as possible with you about the decisions we’re making and resources available to you, including more detailed information, product enhancements, and more content moderators to interface directly with the community and content.
Like you, we love Tumblr and what it’s come to mean for millions of people around the world. Our actions are out of love and hope for our community. We won’t always get this right, especially in the beginning, but we are determined to make your experience a positive one.
The Tumblr I joined in 2009 is no longer in existence. I get that NSFW content attracted pornbots and dodgy links, but this new draconian policy doesn’t chime with the Tumblr I joined almost a decade ago. So as my travels to the site have diminished from every day to maybe once every couple of weeks, I’m pretty safe in assuming Tumblr is no longer the powerful tool in my social media arsenal. So I’m not going to regret finishing with Tumblr and saying goodbye for good. I will no longer post on a site that has sacrificed its principles on freedom of speech and freedom of expression, in such an abject way. Whatever Tumblr becomes from hereon in, I won’t be part of it.
Losing NSFW content was not the only deal breaker. The platform has become clunky and much harder to navigate. I won’t delete my Tumblr forever, but I will not be posting any fresh content. Tumblr was fun once, but I get more satisfaction from other social media platforms. I’m just one guy with a small number of followers, and my decision alone won’t be hitting Tumblr very hard, but I strongly suspect that others like me will be thinking hard about their Tumblr futures and deciding the game ain’t worth the candle anymore.
Thanks for the memories. I met some awesome people through this platform. I’ll miss you all.
Choice involves decision making. It can include judging the merits of multiple options and selecting one or more of them. One can make a choice between imagined options (“What would I do if…?”) or between real options followed by the corresponding action. For example, a traveller might choose a route for a journey based on the preference of arriving at a given destination as soon as possible. The preferred (and therefore chosen) route can then follow from information such as the length of each of the possible routes, traffic conditions, etc. The arrival at a choice can include more complex motivators such as cognition, instinct, and feeling.
Simple choices might include what to eat for dinner or what to wear on a Saturday morning – choices that have relatively low-impact on the chooser’s life overall. More complex choices might involve (for example) what candidate to vote for in an election, what profession to pursue, a life partner, etc. – choices based on multiple influences and having larger ramifications.
Freedom of choice is generally cherished, whereas a severely limited or artificially restricted choice can lead to discomfort with choosing, and possibly an unsatisfactory outcome. In contrast, a choice with excessively numerous options may lead to confusion, regret of the alternatives not taken, and indifference in an unstructured existence;[1] and the illusion that choosing an object or a course, necessarily leads to the control of that object or course, can cause psychological problems.
Choices that are can be engineered to influence preferred outcomes, aren’t really choices. You’re conditioned and influenced by those who would prefer your choice to lead that outcome. They will persuade you that you’re making this choice in the knowledge that your own preferences are merely incidental. They’ll make false promises. They’ll lie to your face, as long as your choice matters to them. And once you’ve made that choice, all that matters then is their preferred outcome, not yours. You made the choice, they’ll remind you. They will determine the outcome.
A true test of democracy is not acting on that first choice, blindly pursuing that towards an outcome, nobody envisaged let alone wanted. Yet here we are.
Theresa May has to now sell us this Brexit deal. She has to commit to what she negotiated. If it’s voted down by Parliament, then a fresh choice will emerge. But first, she must persuade MPs that if they don’t vote for her deal, they’ll risk No Deal. And to sell her deal, she must tell MPs what the legal advice was, that led to negotiators reaching this deal. And she must use No Deal scenarios to show how much better her deal is compared to No Deal. She is now committed to a binary choice. She has ruled out No Brexit. However, this third choice represents two different things:
For those who voted Remain, No Brexit is the desirable outcome. Those of us who have seen how damaging this entire process has been, No Brexit is a vindication. We remain in the EU, under current terms. The United Kingdom will remain amajor player in its structure, a full participant in its institutions, and we shall continue to pay our membership and benefit from access to the Single Market and its trading partners.
For those who voted Leave, it’s a much more fundamental issue. No Brexit represents a failure of democracy and a loss of faith in the entire democratic process. The Leavers were told they had gained the UK’s “independence” from the EU, and that we would be free to negotiate trade deals of our own. For some, the chief concern was immigration. For some, their chief concern was future prosperity. And during this process, they had been told of retaining all the benefits without the obligations. But the government were reticent. They still haven’t published in full, their Impact Assessments. They still haven’t produced their legal advice, on which negotiations were based. Leavers have been cynically placated with false promises. Even now, some Leavers will tell you that the immediate impact of No Deal is “Project Fear” and will stick to the long disproved rhetoric of Farage, Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Davis and Raab. Even those who back May’s Deal like Gove and Fox are biding their time. And Leavers will continue to insist we get on with it. They haven’t considered just how difficult it will be to function, outside of the EU and without any existing trade deal in place. As a major trading nation, such a situation is unprecedented.
On the face of it, avoiding all the heartache of disgruntled Leavers and a disastrous No Deal, means May’s Deal is the best option. After all, negotiations result in compromise and not getting everything you want. May will insist that Brexit under these terms delivers on the referendum; we’ll leave the EU. We’ll end Freedom of Movement, we’ll protect our borders with the Backstop, we’ii enter a transition period, which will enable us to prepare for Brexit under these terms, and we’ll be able to negotiate new deals. However, the Backstop ties our hands. The EU will have a veto determining our ability to fully exit the Customs Union. Our immediate future will mean accepting changes in all sorts of rules, without a say. We’ll pay back our negotiated divorce bill of £39bn. Will we ever live long enough to say we have fully exited under these terms, when they represent Brexit In Name Only? What choice will we have, if this deal is rejected?
Here’s what I think could happen
May’s deal is voted down. May will be faced with another No Confidence vote, this time not from within her party, but from Parliament against the government. She will forced to resign. The government cannot maintain power without a working majority as the DUP will withdraw their Confidence and Supply arrangement, so a General Election will be called. Campaigns will be focused on the offer of a 2nd referendum to determine if we accept the only deal available, accept a No Deal exit or withdraw Article 50 and remain as we are in the EU. It could get messy. We could end up with a government of National Unity, charged with delivering on Brexit or overseeing the 2nd referendum. It could mean us making an appeal to the EU to extend the Article 50 period. It could mean we Brexit under EEA terms, or no Brexit at all.
So it becomes an even more fraught choice. But first, we must accept that the choice that was presented to us in 2016 was a false choice. The campaigns of 2016, both Leave and Remain were flawed and dishonest. Too much of the information we received was baseless and fraudulent. Too many shady actors behaved despicably to influence our decisions. And too many voters expected unrealistic outcomes when they made their choice. We need to understand what our choices are, what they’ll lead to and what it will cost us. Nobody voted to be poorer, but that’s exactly what we’ll be if MPs make the wrong choices in our name on December 11th.
If you voted Brexit, I feel sorry for you.
No, I really do.
Here we are. The draftWithdrawal Agreement is here. Theresa May has the impossible task of steering this through Parliament. Judging by the reaction of her fellow MPs on all sides, it looks like it’s going to be voted down. Brexit is in chaos.
The Backstop will commit the UK to the Customs Union indefinitely, except Northern Ireland will be committed to the Customs Union and the Single Market indefinitely. The arrangement can only be cancelled by EU & UK mutual consent, therefore the basis of this agreement underpins any future trade deal, and ties our hands with any other nation or bloc’s future trade arrangements. We are committed to adhering to future EU regulations without a say. This is Brexit In Name Only. If you voted for this in 2016, you have my sympathies. You were deceived by unaccountable newspaper barons. You were deceived by disaster capitalist MPs. You were deceived by murky City Boys with dodgy links to the Kremlin. You were deceived by an establishment that were quick to blame other branches of the establishment that didn’t think like them. Now they will seek to deflect the blame towards the EU, remain MPs, the Left and ordinary remainers, who were suspicious of the motives of these people right from the start. First of all, the blame lies with David Cameron. If it wasn’t for him, we’d still be a member of the EU, with a strong pound and no obligation to partake in “ever closer union” (EU-wide tax, EU army) we’d retain our veto, we’d still enjoy the advantages of the Four Freedoms and we’d be richer than today. Since Brexit was triggered the UK has lost £500,000,000 per week. Countless businesses and jobs have been put at risk, They didn’t put that on the side of that bus.
So if you voted Brexit, you have my sympathy. They did a number on you. They did a number on all of us. Parliament will vote down May’s deal, that is a certainty. Then we will be faced with a stark choice: leave with no deal and succumb to the liars who orchestrated this shambles, or we collectively come to our senses and push for No Brexit. Theresa May won’t countenance the idea. Neither will Jeremy Corbyn, if a snap General Election is called. But there is hope. End the madness. Push for a People’s Vote.
Frustrating, isn’t it? You’ve tried all day to get this puzzle solved, and you’re no closer than you were when you began. You consider cheating and peel off the stickers. You call it a “hack” and kid yourself you’ve beaten the system. No you haven’t. You cheated, and learnt nothing.
So learn to solve the puzzle. Work through what works and what doesn’t. Make educated choices. Start with the corners, then the central squares will be easy. Be methodical and patient. Your goal is closer than you think.
Or learn to cheat smarter. Rubik’s Cubes are easy to “crack open.” When it lies in pieces before you, you’ll see a universal joint. You’ll learn how the cube is designed so the plastic parts move smoothly. And when you reassemble it, you’ll understand how it works. It’s a wonderful example of mechanical engineering. You’ll reassemble it, and as the final piece clicks in, you won’t have solved the puzzle, but you’ll know how the system works, and that is an advantage. You’ll get an insight into the mind of Ernő Rubik.
When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in a flag holding a cross.
- Sinclair Lewis.
It has already already settled there, and has been part of mainstream politics, since the end of WWII. It’s personified by a cartoon made flesh by the name of Donald Trump. In Boris Johnson, Bannon sees another cartoon character to manipulate. Steve Bannon is just another in a long line of far right thinkers with a surprising ability to influence the traditional conservative right wing and push them further into the extreme. Bannon will recite mantras like these to anyone who will listen - “Be unapologetic. Never explain. Double down on your words with actions. Never forget who’s paying you. They will always come first.” That kind of policy isn’t too far from the Tory party we know now. Boris Johnson wants to lead the Conservatives. He won’t oust Theresa May until after Brexit. Then he can portray himself as the Saviour Who Can Do Brexit Properly…or something. The man who advised against May’s Chequers plan. The man who encouraged half the country to believe that the NHS would receive $350m per week after Brexit. Now he’s making Islamophobic comments in his Daily Telegraph column. He’s cosying up to Bannon. He’s portraying himself as the man who will make our country “great again.” Sound familiar?
There’s a more apt quote in relation to fascism in the UK. It comes from Michael Rosen…
We’ve all been there, I’m watching a fascinating programme on daytime TV, or deep-diving YouTube or making a cup of tea, and the phone rings. Phone rings and it must be answered just in case it’s a family member with some news or something, right?
No it’s an unsolicited call from a call-centre operative asking if you’ve had an accident in the last three years or have you claimed PPI or are you interested in taking part in a consumer survey or some shit. What happens next is usually me trying ever so politely to tell them I’m not interested, or if I’ve been interrupted from something important, I’ll be a bit terse with them and hang up. Poor call-centre operatives, trying to make a living by interrupting people’s lives. They probably spend all day being shouted at down the phone. They do this to pay the bills. They probably don’t enjoy doing it, but it’s a job, right? Sometimes, I can’t control my urge to shout at them myself. Short and sweet. Hang up. Let them bother someone else.
Today was different. I know cold-calling has been automated for a while now, but usually it’s a message followed by an option to push one on your keypad to speak to someone. I don’t push one. I hang up. But today…I get an automated call telling me that all their operators were too busy and if I wanted to speak to one of their operatives, I should call this number…
What? Who the fuck are you? What makes you think I want to call you back?
I get it. You’re appealing to my curiosity. It’s the Fear Of Missing Out thing. They want me to ring this number at my expense (unless it’s 0800…but I’m still giving up my time aren’t I?) to find out what the fuck it was they were after me for. But they’re too busy for people to call me, so they use a computer with an automated message. After all their staff are too busy taking calls from those people whose resistance to FOMO is low. Well fuck you (insert company name here) why should I bother? You could be bogus and I end up being scammed. Or you could be trying to sell me something I don’t need. Or worse still, you want to give my details to other telemarketing companies, so my tally of unwanted, unsolicited calls increase. Bollocks to that.
Fascinating video, about the sourcing of wood for the Temple, The Burning Man and some of the art installations for last year’s Burning Man Festival.
What intrigues me is the continuing theme of impermanence; that we are all here temporarily and there’s so much more to this world than we’ll ever truly know.
We get caught up in work and relationships and we get distracted by the little things that don’t matter, in the greater scheme of things. I’ve never really counted myself as being very spiritual, but if there’s one place in the world where I could possibly find something that might be described as peace, it would be in the centre of the Temple at Black Rock, Nevada. I might never get there, but that doesn’t matter either, because knowing it exists for a few short days each year, and knowing that it will be reduced to a pile of ash is enough. The ritual of acknowledging our impermanence offers something that mainstream religions tend not to. Eternal life isn’t the goal. It never was.
I’m not Jewish. I do believe that the state of Israel has the right to exist. My 2nd statement would make me a Zionist. That in itself is a word with many connotations surrounding the right of Israelis to build settlements on occupied Palestinian Territories, the current Israeli government’s foreign policy and many more issues, that if I discussed as someone not of the Jewish faith, would possibly make me an anti-Semite. I would really hope I’m not. I would really hope my worldview is not prejudiced and the notion of a particular faith group being somehow inferior, is anathema to me. Does that mean certain individuals from within that group are above criticism because they happen to be Jewish? No, that’s ridiculous. I hope I can criticise Israeli foreign policy and certain elements of the Israeli government without being branded an anti-Semite.
I really find it difficult to believe that members of the Labour Party would be so vehemently vocal against those who call for Jeremy Corbyn to take the anti-Semitism problem more seriously. They apparently don’t see the distinction between an attack on Corbyn and defending the right of Jews to defend themselves by protesting outside Parliament. Some Corbyn supporters have attacked the likes of David Lammy for defending Jewish organisations, who simply want Corbyn to rein in or expel the anti-Semitic elements within the Labour Left.
The issue of the mural that sparked this controversy is not too complicated for a ordinary guy like me to recognise. The mural portrays a group of Jewish stereotypes that make up a so-called New World Order. The symbol of the Illuminati is central to the image. In the foreground a group of old, white, apparently Jewish men play monopoly on a table made of cowed figures. It’s a patently anti-Semitic image, that speaks to conspiracy theorists and far right groups alike. The strange thing is, that it apparently speaks to Hard Left Labour supporters and party members, some of which could be described as Corbynist, seems counter to the principle of anti-racism, upon which the modern Labour movement holds at its core. There is a conflict, when you consider that many support the rights of Palestinians, but Labour does support the Two State Solution, so there really should be no conflict. The perception that challenging the neoliberal status quo, could in some way be counter or somehow be construed as anti-Semitic is a tougher nut to crack. Some sections of the left see investment banks like Goldman Sachs having too much influence pn the political stage, which in itself could be construed as anti-Semitic, even if such a criticism in no way is targeted against the Jewish faith. There may be other examples, but to ignore these allegations or brush them under the carpet is tacitly anti-Semitic.
Corbyn needs to lead, and bring in Jewish voices to puncture these prejudices before it’s too late. An open and frank dialogue must take place. Identify the myths and dispel them. Labour has an anti-Semitism problem. And so do the Conservatives. Let’s not pretend for one moment that the extreme right wing within the Conservative party should escape scrutiny. Everyone needs to stop and think: why are we allowing toxic prejudices to take hold in the 21st Century?
Wayne LaPierre criticised “the Elites” and “socialists”
#WeCallBS
NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre went after the elites again. That’s the CEO of arguably Washington’s most powerful lobbying organisation. That’s the man who earns $970,000 pa, but in 2015 earned in excess of $5.1m. That’s the man that’s had Senators, including Marco Rubio, in his pocket, not to mention President Trump who received £31m NRA donations.
He is by definition an “elite.” We know he’s adhering to the populist playbook. He’s speaking to his 5 million members, using the same language Steve Bannon used on Breitbart, the same language Christina Fernandaz used in Argentina, the same language prominent Brexit advocates used in the UK. The Parkland school shooting has mobilised a groundswell of young protesters who are scared that their schools are not safe. They are concerned that their message will be buried under arguments and counter-arguments that do nothing, but bury the issue of school shooters access to assault weapons, that really have no place in the public domain.
The 2nd Amendment is a barrier to progress, not because of its wording, but because of its interpretation by the shills of the firearms manufacturers like Wayne LaPierre, and the cynical pursuit of buying the White House and the Senate to quash gun control legislation.
