Photo 24 Apr 52,925 notes naomster:

sharkchunks:

hellsquidsintl:

There was, of course, an increase in heart attacks and traffic accidents as people panicked trying to escape the ghost deer.

A significant decline in dementors as well.

swiggity swag the nightmare stag

naomster:

sharkchunks:

hellsquidsintl:

There was, of course, an increase in heart attacks and traffic accidents as people panicked trying to escape the ghost deer.

A significant decline in dementors as well.

swiggity swag the nightmare stag

(Source: grindlebone)

Video 23 Apr 82,491 notes

greatest-adventurer:

are you fucking kidding me

(Source: bolined)

Video 23 Apr 134,454 notes

(Source: sandandglass)

Photo 23 Apr 1,288 notes berenzero:

socimages:

How to lie with statistics: The relationship between Florida’s Stand Your Ground law and gun deaths.
At Junk Charts, Kaiser Fung drew my attention to a graph released by Reuters.  It is so deeply misleading that I loathe to expose your eyeballs to it.  So, I offer you the mishmash above.
The original figure is on the left.  It counts the number of gun deaths in Florida.  A line rises, bounces a little, reaches a 2nd highest peak labeled “2005, Florida enacted its ‘Stand Your Ground’ law,” and falls precipitously.
What do you see?
Most people see a huge fall-off in the number of gun deaths after Stand Your Ground was passed.  But that’s not what the graph shows.  A quick look at the vertical axis reveals that the gun deaths are counted from top (0) to bottom (800).  The highest peaks are the fewest gun deaths and the lowest ones are the most.  A rise in the line, in other words, reveals a reduction in gun deaths.  The graph on the right — flipped both horizontally and vertically — is more intuitive to most: a rising line reflects a rise in the number of gun deaths and a dropping a drop.
The proper conclusion, then, is that gun deaths skyrocketed after Stand Your Ground was enacted.
This example is a great reminder that we bring our own assumptions to our reading of any illustration of data.  The original graph may have broken convention, making the intuitive read of the image incorrect, but the data is, presumably, sound.  It’s our responsibility, then, to always do our due diligence in absorbing information.  The alternative is to be duped.
Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions, with Myra Marx Ferree. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

What the fuck, people…

berenzero:

socimages:

How to lie with statistics: The relationship between Florida’s Stand Your Ground law and gun deaths.

At Junk Charts, Kaiser Fung drew my attention to a graph released by Reuters.  It is so deeply misleading that I loathe to expose your eyeballs to it.  So, I offer you the mishmash above.

The original figure is on the left.  It counts the number of gun deaths in Florida.  A line rises, bounces a little, reaches a 2nd highest peak labeled “2005, Florida enacted its ‘Stand Your Ground’ law,” and falls precipitously.

What do you see?

Most people see a huge fall-off in the number of gun deaths after Stand Your Ground was passed.  But that’s not what the graph shows.  A quick look at the vertical axis reveals that the gun deaths are counted from top (0) to bottom (800).  The highest peaks are the fewest gun deaths and the lowest ones are the most.  A rise in the line, in other words, reveals a reduction in gun deaths.  The graph on the right — flipped both horizontally and vertically — is more intuitive to most: a rising line reflects a rise in the number of gun deaths and a dropping a drop.

The proper conclusion, then, is that gun deaths skyrocketed after Stand Your Ground was enacted.

This example is a great reminder that we bring our own assumptions to our reading of any illustration of data.  The original graph may have broken convention, making the intuitive read of the image incorrect, but the data is, presumably, sound.  It’s our responsibility, then, to always do our due diligence in absorbing information.  The alternative is to be duped.

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions, with Myra Marx Ferree. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

What the fuck, people…

Video 23 Apr 407 notes

(Source: daphneontherun)

via Eyy.
Photo 23 Apr 56,435 notes a-little-melancholy:

chaz-gelf:

sixmilliondeadinternets:

Gandhi has been historically the most aggressive character in Civilization due to an original bug in the first game that caused him to go all-out once he reaches democracy. They just kept the thing going ever since.


To further explain this bug, because I was chatting with mothmonarch about Civilization and other strategy games last night and I never got around to explaining this fully, but I love this story:
Gandhi’s AI in the original game had its aggression set to the absolute minimum (0 on a scale of 0 to 10, I believe, I may have this wrong but the basic idea I’m about to explain is accurate, as far as I can tell). Adopting democracy lowers an AI civ’s aggression by 2 points, so when someone who is fully peaceful loses two points of aggression, they should still be nice and polite, right?
Except this is an old DOS game, and so computer math is in place. What actually happened was that Gandhi’s aggression level ticked backwards two steps, from 0 to 255. On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.
And that’s the story as I recall it, but again I may have gotten some details wrong, so feel free to correct me! After that, as the original poster said, the devs loved the bug so much that they just kept it in as a running joke!

“On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.”I about pissed myself laughing at this.

a-little-melancholy:

chaz-gelf:

sixmilliondeadinternets:

Gandhi has been historically the most aggressive character in Civilization due to an original bug in the first game that caused him to go all-out once he reaches democracy. They just kept the thing going ever since.

To further explain this bug, because I was chatting with mothmonarch about Civilization and other strategy games last night and I never got around to explaining this fully, but I love this story:

Gandhi’s AI in the original game had its aggression set to the absolute minimum (0 on a scale of 0 to 10, I believe, I may have this wrong but the basic idea I’m about to explain is accurate, as far as I can tell). Adopting democracy lowers an AI civ’s aggression by 2 points, so when someone who is fully peaceful loses two points of aggression, they should still be nice and polite, right?

Except this is an old DOS game, and so computer math is in place. What actually happened was that Gandhi’s aggression level ticked backwards two steps, from 0 to 255On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.

And that’s the story as I recall it, but again I may have gotten some details wrong, so feel free to correct me! After that, as the original poster said, the devs loved the bug so much that they just kept it in as a running joke!

On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.”

I about pissed myself laughing at this.

(Source: halcy)

Photo 22 Apr 20,141 notes jolly-plaguefather:

inprnt:

"Portrait of a Family" by Jessica Warrick on INPRNT

Gosh, that is a handsome family.
Photo 22 Apr 236,599 notes gruntledandhinged:

ALL of this. Encourage people to try new words, to mess them up, to experiment with vocabulary, to learn complicated adjectives and verbs and nouns, because words are fun.
Also, don’t be a jerk.

gruntledandhinged:

ALL of this. Encourage people to try new words, to mess them up, to experiment with vocabulary, to learn complicated adjectives and verbs and nouns, because words are fun.

Also, don’t be a jerk.

Text 22 Apr 77,433 notes

snh-snh-snh:

I keep thinking oh man, I’m so immature. How am I allowed to be an adult.

Then I spend time with teenagers.

And it’s like, wow, okay, yeah. I am an adult. I am so adult. Look at me adulting all over the place.

Link 22 Apr 89 notes ANIKI'S FIRST GIVEAWAY FINALLY!!»

aniki-tony:

Hey you, Yeah you, Following this blog. Thanks for that. Here is a way I will give back to you guys.

This Giveaway will literally be a 2 prize giveaway.

First Prize: A $100 purchase of any Good *If it’s like 110 I might be generous* for the few who I know how would love a driver or a Figurart….


Design crafted by Prashanth Kamalakanthan. Powered by Tumblr.