On the Internet Everyone Knows You Could Be a Dog, or Why I Think Aaron Sorkin Is Wrong About the Value of Established Media Outlets (via researchtobedone)
The mistake people make when they talk about not being able to trust Wikipedia is in the implicit assumption that we could trust encyclopedias as infallible sources before Wikipedia.
I like Wikipedia because I know it could be wrong. Regular encyclopedias can be wrong, too, but my guard was never up in the same way with them as it is with Wikipedia. I like Internet media specifically for the reason that Aaron Sorkin doesn’t like it: because it makes it that much more difficult for me to have any illusions about the fact that the burden of critical thought is on me.
I don’t automatically trust bloggers because a group of people I’ve never met decided to give them a badge that says “reporter” on it. I don’t turn off my critical thinking because they’ve gotten to be some sort of “professional”. I have to judge them on the merits of their writing and history of thoughtfulness or thoughtlessness alone. That is a feature, not a bug, because we should never trust any news media outlet implicitly.
Made some stupid brain socks for my boyfriend (who is finishing a PhD in cognitive neuroscience). Left sock has the left side of the brain and skills typically associated with that side. Right sock has the medial surface of the brain (but sideways, pretend it is turned to the right) and skills typically associated with the right side of the brain.
remember that first live action scooby doo movie. where the antagonist was literally scrappy doo and he was stealing peoples souls, like actually really stealing and absorbing souls, and was planning on taking scoobys soul to rule the world with an army of demons and get revenge on the gang after they abandoned him because he kept peeing in the car, and near the end he turned into this huge dog monster
a real movie