Pick a note, every result above 8.3% gets added to the chord. Highest result is the root.
A
A sharp / B flat
B
C
C sharp / D flat
D
D sharp / E Flat
E
F
F sharp / G flat
G
G sharp / A flat
See Results
humpback whale
Tonight, The Marriage of Figaro!
We’re at the intermission now, things are getting real spicy.
you heard of the academic icarus, now get ready for:
- Academic Achilleus: your argument is pretty indisputable and strong- except for that one weak spot that could take it (and you) to the grave.
- Academic Ulysses: you are soooo close to your conclusion but somehow something always leads you astray. you have been writing this paper for what feels like 10 years. the gods are against you
- Academic Sisyphus: You have deleted and rewritten this paragraph numerous times. it still does not work out. you delete it again.
and may I also interest you in:
- Academic Tantalus: You found the perfect source online. You click on it, all information you need in reach. it turns out to be behind a paywall.
- Academic Pandora: You open your inbox. there are 7 unread e-mails.
- Academic Paris: You had to make one (1) judgement call. your choice seemed good back then. it does not seem good now.
You know what? one more on the house:
- Acamdemic Antigone: you challenged you professor on some point. you may even have been right, but at what cost.
Academic Oedipus: despite all your efforts, it went exactly the way your supervisor said it was gonna go, and now everyone is cursing your name until you’re ready to claw your eyes out.
Academic Persephone: from October to March you’re in hell. Still better than working retail.
How did we not add Academic Theseus: when your final submission contains so many revisions you question if it’s the same paper.
i truly wish Elon would delete the bird (or whatever the fuck he’s calling it now) app because sometimes i witness something that has escaped containment and it’s the kind of take that couldn’t have been generated anywhere but that specific hellhole
As always, the Irish speak nothing but facts.
How many more innocent civilians have to be killed by Israel before you condemn that for it?
That is a genocide.
That this is a crime on all accounts.
And deserves to be punished to the full extent off the law.
Video transcript, because some of the video captions are inaccurate. Transcript begins:
I have a simple question for you.
How many innocent Palestinian civilians - men, women, and children - does Israel have to slaughter? How many war crimes does Israel have to commit? How much death and destruction does Israel have to visit on the people of Gaza and Palestine, before you will call for and impose sanctions on Israel, and expel the Israeli ambassador from this country, and call for the immediate referral of Israel to the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity and war crimes?
Because in front of the world, by their own admission, Israel is committing war crimes. They have stated it publicly. This isn't a matter of opinion.
Uh, they declared their intention to force through the threat of military bombardment more than a million, and it is now well more than a million, Palestinians from their homes in northern Gaza and ethnically cleanse them. A crime against humanity.
They stated publicly, and have done it in front of the eyes of the world, their intention to deny to 2.2 million people water, electricity, medicine, life saving equipment, in front of the eyes of the world, and they're doing it.
And every minute children are being slaughtered by their artillery, the relentless bombardment of residential complexes, of hospitals, of schools, of civilian infrastructure.
They just go on and on and on, and you do nothing. Nothing. Words of concern, but no action to hold them to account. And it is clearly pre-meditated war crimes and genocide. Genocide. We have Jewish people in the United States and Canada, around the world, and Israel, calling a genocide. Scholars, academics, saying this is genocidal.
Let me quote you a few things. Israeli general, quote: "Human animals must be treated as such. There will be no electricity or water, there will only be destruction."
Uh- Yoav Gallant, a minister, says "we are fighting human animals", we will, quote, "act accordingly". We will remove, quote, "every restriction on the IDF."
Smotrich, another minister, "there is no such thing as the Palestinians."
The president of Israel refers to the people of Gaza and says they are all responsible. Before October the 7th Netanyahu appeared before the UN general assembly with a map of Israel that had removed all references to Palestine: a clear declaration of intent to destroy the Palestinian people and steal all of their land. 6000 Palestinians killed between 2008 before October the 7th. Thousands of Palestinians hostage in administrative detention without trial. When are you going to move beyond words of concern and impose sanctions and expel the Israeli ambassador of this apartheid murderous state.
Transcript ends.
It's apparently that time of the season to reopen the Russian psyop discourse yet again. In this case I was struck by one particular point as especially goofy:
No No, we're not seeing a resurgence in radical thought due to the increasingly exposed contradictions of capitalist hegemony
Except that none of the accounts I saw that were subsequently identified as such were actually saying anything particularly radical. It was very much by the numbers funnyman doomer "both sides are exactly the same" shit. It wasn't like bellygangstaboo et al were frothing at the mouth to get people into mutual aid, civil disobedience, or even political violence. There's nothing particularly radical about being for all intents and purposes apolitical.
It's also interesting to observe people in every one of these debates clutching their pearls and crying out "how dare you impugn the honor of these real authentic black people?!" This is the internet, and people are, in fact, allowed to lie on it. Even if we accept for sake of argument that the thing about Russian plants is totally fake, we still don't actually know the race (or other demographic features) of 95% of the people we interact with on here.
I guess the best marks are generally the ones who get mortally offended when someone suggests they're being conned.
Though I guess now I think about it there's a specific cleverness there from a psyop's perspective. No one wants to admit they fell for a con, but they especially don't want to admit they fell for someone basically putting on blackface. It makes it substantially more socially costly to admit that one was wrong to trust the account, and thus makes people more likely to reflexively defend that trust.
Obviously it's a high risk play if it's a personal account that could get back to you and cause you real consequences (say, with the whole race-faking thing with hivliving, because I never can turn down an opportunity to quote the phrase "gentrifying cannibalism"), but if you're just making sock puppet accounts for political purposes for your job, it seems pretty insightful.
In the years leading up to 1948, as European Jewish settlement reached its zenith, due in part to the genocide Germany was perpetrating against European Jewry, Palestinians were increasingly pushed out of their own villages, towns, and cities. For the settler colonists impatient with the British Empire, which for decades had provided the funds and space for what was called the Yishuv to take over Palestine, the 1940s was a period of protracted armed resistance against the British.
The colonization of Palestine was transformed in successive narrations by the colonists themselves, and later their supporters, into an anticolonial struggle. Leon Uris’s 1958 novel Exodus and the 1960 film by the same name starring Paul Newman infamously represented to a captive American audience the paramilitaries of the Yishuv as akin to the minutemen of New England, bravely fighting British injustice. Such heroic accounts elided the violence dispensed upon the Palestinians by transforming the colonists into the victims of imperial aggression rather than the beneficiaries of imperial patronage.
In The Revolt, his 1951 biography of the Irgun, Menachem Begin would assiduously justify the tactics of his group while denying their primary victims. “We were not ‘terrorists’,” he’d insist. “We were strictly speaking anti-terrorists.” What was clearly done and sometimes plainly stated were continuously buried lies.
Already in his 1938 insider account of Arab nationalism, The Arab Awakening, George Antonius had grasped the challenge faced by Palestinians: “For the historian, the study of the Palestine problem is beset with peculiar difficulties … To the ordinary tasks of a student dealing with the facts is thus added an obligation to deal with the pseudo-facts and dethrone them from their illegitimate eminence.”
[...]
To speak, then, of “cycles” of violence is to ignore the clear path that brought us here. One could read utterances made and recount actions taken by the Zionist leadership from 1948 annually until those made by the Israeli government on this very day, and see again and again the desire, the plan, and the means to expel or kill the Palestinian people. Concomitantly, to read the past words of Palestinian observers of this violence is not to travel in time but to be delivered to the present. Edward Said’s 1997 essay “Deir Yassin Recalled” could have been written today not because Said was prescient and brilliant—although he was—but because the situation in Palestine since then has hardly changed, and certainly not for the better.
“The entire idea,” Said wrote of Zionism, “has always therefore been to reduce the Palestinian actuality to nil, to efface Palestinians as a people with legitimate rights, to render them alien in their own land.” “And indeed,” he continued, “Israel has so far succeeded in its own mind. The Oslo peace process, the settlements, the arrogant defiance of Netanyahu: these all derive in a straight line from events like Deir Yassin and the idea that made Deir Yassin into the massacre it was.”
For the last few days, video has circulated of a 95-year-old Israeli army reservist named Ezra Yachin giving a pep talk to younger soldiers heading to the frontlines. “Be triumphant and finish them off … erase the memory of them. Erase them, their families, mothers and children,” he says. Yachin embodies the straight line from Deir Yassin to now because he himself participated in the massacre as a 20-year-old. In an interview from 2020 he recalled his role in the massacre: “It is true that women and youngsters were killed, but that was because they served as fighters.”
Yoooo Guess who had a baby
Santa Cruz otter 841 who was attacking surfers earlier this year
The articles about it have all had some trite little quip about how they hope she’ll be too busy to attack surfers which WOW why do you want women to quit their careers when they become parents? 🤔 seems misotternistic