pridesquishy

floaty friends - credit if using

“I always remember having this fight with a random dude who claimed that ‘straight white men’ were the only true innovators. His prime example for this was the computer… the computer… THE COMPUTER!!! THE COM-PU-TER!!!

Alan Turing - Gay man and ‘father of computing’ Wren operating Bombe - The code cracking computers of the 2nd world war were entirely run by women Katherine Johnson - African American NASA mathematician and ‘Human computer’ Ada Lovelace - arguably the 1st computer programmer”

- Sacha Coward

Also Margaret Hamilton - NASA computer scientist who put the first man on the moon - an as-yet-unmatched feet of software engineering, here pictured beside the full source of that computer programme. #myhero

Grace Hopper - the woman that coined the term “bug”

- @robinlayfield

Grace Hopper did more than coin the term “bug”. She invented the first program linker in the early 1950s, for the UNIVAC I. A program linker translates instructions from one language to another (for example, numerical codes that represent instructions translated to machine code that computers can read), which is the very foundation of how computer’s operate independently. she also pulled a steve rogers and tried to enlist in the military a bunch of times and was denied. then, an exception was made for her when she joined the navy reserves, and she ended up serving for over 40 years (half of which was active duty). she retired from the navy Rear Admiral Grace Hopper. she was born in NYC in 1906. Grace Hopper was a fucking badass.

also computing was typically a job for women (many of whom were black women that made incredible contributions) back in the day, so it’s absolutely fucking wild that straight white men think they are the foundation of computer innovation. men PUSHED women out and took the credit.

luismatortugas

ousia-poetica

Loving you it´s not always being by your side, is not always thinking about you, is not always dreaming about you; it´s to be available for you, it´s to be you, become one with you, it´s to be aware of your dreams, and of mine with you, it´s allowing you to know me completely all the way to the very center of my pain, and of my love.

Loving you is not to shelter myself in you; it´s building a shelter together, with our hands, where the whole world can fit in.

Loving you is not writing you love poems; is being love when I write to you, and when I don´t.

Loving you is not expecting something from you; is simply waiting for you, in the silence, at night and in the day.

Loving you is not flattering you, it´s not enhancing your vanity, it´s not weakening you, it´s not confusing you; it´s to show you the value of your shadow, the wonder of your own light, it´s to help you to live alert, it´s to want you to fly while I watch you, absorbed, joyful.

Loving you is not just looking at you, smelling you or tasting you; it´s to look along with you at anything at the same time, to become one with your scent, to be a part of you.

Loving you is not to write that I love you; is sharing with you the best of me (love), without ever turning back, without a horizon.

Loving you it´s not renounce to my dreams for you; it´s to awake from my dreams with you, held by your hand.

Loving you is not to demand from you, it´s not forcing you, it’s not to put pressure on you, is not convincing you, is not defeating you; it´s to help you to break free from yourself, from me, from it all, it´s to give you my breath, to seduce you without any desire, nor an objective, it´s to enjoy you.

Loving you is not saying that I love you, is not thinking that I loved you, that I will love you; it´s to ask myself whether I love you, it´s to feel it, allowing it to develop in me, without even needing to tell you about it.

Loving you is not projecting ideas about you, it´s not idealizing you; it´s to see you from afar, from up close, from inside, (from you), from outside, see you beyond me.

Loving you is not to fear you, is not to own you, is not to guard you, Is not to watch you; it´s to hug you warmly, it´s to open my door to you, it´s to observe you in plain sight, in total darkness, with the eyes of my soul.

To love you it´s not to want you only when you love me, when you´re pretty, when you smile, when you kiss me, when you caress me, when you walk with elegance, when you are calm, when you are happy; it´s to accept you completely just as you are, always and everywhere, with simplicity, and joy.

Loving you it´s not to reject your flaws; it´s to become sensitive to them, without ever expecting you to change them. Loving you is not to desire to be the center of your life; it´s to lead you, if you allow me, if am able to, to the life of your core, without looking for any rewards.

Loving you is not to look at you from above, or from below, from behind, from the front; it´s to cultivate a balance that goes back and forth passing by our common center.

Creative Commons (cc) Authors: mavisu kumsal-things boowormblue ousia-poetica

Amarte no es desear ser el centro de tu vida; es conducirte, si tú me lo permites, si soy capaz de hacerlo, a la vida de tu centro, sin buscar recompensas.

Amarte no es refugiarme en tu persona; es construir un refugio juntos, con nuestras propias manos, donde pueda caber el mundo entero.

Amarte no es escribirte mis poemas de amor; es ser amor cuando te escribo, y cuando no.

Amarte no es esperar algo de ti; es simplemente esperarte, en silencio, de noche y de día.

Amarte no es estar siempre a tu lado, no es pensar siempre en ti, no es soñar siempre contigo; es estar disponible para ti, es ser tú, hacerme uno contigo, es ser consciente de tus sueños, y de los míos contigo, es permitir que me conozcas por entero hasta el mismo centro de mi dolor, y de mi amor.

Amarte no es halagarte, no es envanecerte, no es debilitarte, no es llamar tu atención, no es confundirte; es mostrarte la valía de tu sombra, la maravilla de tu propia luz, es ayudarte a vivir alerta, es querer que vueles mientras te miro, absorto, dichoso.

Amarte no es escribir que te amo; es compartir contigo lo mejor de mí (el amor), sin vuelta atrás, sin horizonte.

Amarte no es renunciar a mis sueños por ti; es despertar de mis sueños, contigo, tomado de tu mano.

Amarte no es exigirte, no es obligarte, no es presionarte, no es convencerte, no es derrotarte; es ayudarte a liberarte de ti, de mí, de todo, es prestarte mi aliento, seducirte sin deseos, ni objetivos, es disfrutar de ti.

Amarte no es decirte que te amo, no es pensar que te amé, que te amaré; es preguntarme a mí mismo si te amo, es sentirlo, dejando que se desarrolle en mí, sin necesidad alguna de decírtelo.

Amarte no es proyectar ideas sobre ti, no es idealizarte; es verte desde lejos, desde cerca, desde dentro (desde ti), desde fuera, verte desde más allá de mí.

Amarte no es temerte, no es poseerte, no es custodiarte, no es vigilarte; es abrazarte cálidamente, es abrirte mi puerta, es observarte a plena luz, en total oscuridad, con los ojos del alma.

Amarte no es exigirte, no es obligarte, no es presionarte, no es convencerte, no es derrotarte; es ayudarte a liberarte de ti, de mí, de todo, es prestarte mi aliento, seducirte sin deseos, ni objetivos, es disfrutar de ti.

Amarte no es quererte únicamente cuando me amas, cuando estás guapa, cuando te sonríes, cuando me besas, cuando me acaricias, cuando caminas con elegancia, cuando estás tranquila, cuando estás feliz; es aceptarte entera tal cual eres, siempre y en todo lugar, con sencillez, con alegría.

Amarte no es rechazar tus defectos; es hacerme sensible a ellos y hacerte sensible a ellos, sin esperar jamás que los cambies.

Amarte no es sólo mirarte, olerte, o probarte; es mirar contigo a la vez cualquier cosa, hacerme uno con tu olor, formar parte de ti.

Fusión poética (Turquía - Argentína)

luismatortugas

solitude-to-my-soul-deactivated

luismatortugas

transparentgentlemenmarker

very important orchestra performance. please watch

Orchestra: *plays* Crowd: *silent* Dog: *walks on stage* Crowd: *applauds*

darnni

Dog: *lays down*

Crowd: “more applause*

luismatortugas

visual-infinity

gamielcarrion

I think fear is contagious, but so is hope and it is more powerful than any disease, I think it is the cure for any virus.

So, from the place where I am I decide to share hope, I’m tired of seeing my news feed filled with virus. Here’s something different l to look at. Feel free for share.

If you want to chat or just share memes, do not hesitate to write me.

luismatortugas

a-dinosaur-a-day

Extinction Week: Ordovician-Silurian

Before Picture. No one knows what is coming. Oh hey look some vertebrates guys it’s grandma. Art from http://www.deviantart.com/art/Ordovician-sea-185488097

Time: 450-440 Million years ago, from the Katian age of the Late Ordovician to the Aeronian age of the Llandovery Epoch of the Silurian, Paleozoic, Phanerozoic Eon

Analogy: Your house freezes. About a third of your relatives die in the cold. The rest of you get used to the change in environment. Then your house returns to normal. You’re not adapted to that anymore. Another third of your relatives die. You remain. It all happened so fast that you’re not sure what occurred. You just remember being cold and not having enough oxygen for a little while.

Another before picture. No amount of giant shell will protect you, giant molluscs. Art from http://www.uc.edu/news/nr.aspx?id=11609

Causes: This was a DOUBLE WHAMMY extinction! Two events happened back to back, only separated by about 4 million years, and combined they were the second biggest extinction of marine life, only below the Permian-Triassic. Yet we never talk about it. How strange. We even have both an effect and some possible causes! Huzzah!

Ok so when last we left off things that at least somewhat resembled modern life were starting to evolve. Hooray! Since then there have been some ups and downs - I’m not going to lie you guys, I’m skipping some of the more minor mass extinctions - but in general things continued to diversify; there was even an “explosion” of life in the Ordovician called the Ordovician radiation. Molluscs became varied and common, reef-forming corals evolved, and the first jawed fish evolved - yay! Jaws! Trilobites also declined a lot, which is a huge bummer; those that remained were a lot different than those in the Cambrian, with weird spines and nodules to help them defend against all the new predators who evolved. Green algae were common and Some non-vascular plants like liverworts probably evolved and crawled onto land, though they stuck close to the coast.

Hello moss, how are you this fine day. Art from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordovician

So given that life on the land was extremely limited, we can really just talk about the mass extinctions in the sea. Well, like I said, it was a double whammy. There was a big fall in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, correlated by a burst of volcanic activity. The supercontinent Gondwana was also drifting back towards the South Pole, which made it colder. The combination of lower CO2 exacerbated that situation and ice caps formed over Gondwana.

That ice didn’t come from nowhere - the glaciation took up water form the ocean, and time between glaciation periods would then release it, so the sea level repeatedly dropped and rise. The inland seas in the Ordovician withdrew as a result, which eliminated many niches, and then when they returned, new organisms swooped in to take their place.

So that’s how the first pulse of extinction went - everything began to freeze, so a bunch of stuff died. That’s what happened around 450 million years ago. And, for a brief time there, things returned to normal - things adapted to the new water conditions and habitats.

And then seismic sections began to shift, causing a change in water currents and oxygenation of the lower parts of the ocean. They turned anoxic - no oxygen - and nutrients were brought up and removed from bottom dwelling communities. Furthermore, the glaciation periods also stopped, which removed the random changes in sea level, and the sea level rose once again, but the damage had been done. It’s also possible that toxic metals may have flooded the ocean floor when oxygen was depleted, which would have also harmed the food chains.

Yay! Death!

Stop stealing all the water you turds. Art from http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/extinction_events/Ordovician%E2%80%93Silurian_extinction_event

Extinction Rate: About 60-70% of all species, 57% of all genera, and 27% of all families, so that’s - well, that’s a lot. And in a paper that should come out soonish, Dr. Plotnick (from the university that I go to) talks about how really, our rates of mass extinction in all of the ones we’re going to talk to are probably much lower than they actually were thanks to fossil preservation bias. So… more death!

Aftermath:

Well, brachiopods and bryozoans were greatly reduced, along with trilobites, conodonts, and graptolites. But where there is death, there is always soon life.

Want something to take over your empty ecological niches? Why not Zoidberg(’s distant superficial lookalikes. In that they have claws.) http://museumvictoria.com.au/melbournemuseum/discoverycentre/600-million-years/timeline/silurian/

The Silurian as a truly revolutionary period in Earth’s history, with the first macrofossils of terrestrial organisms - all plant evidence prior to this point had been spore fossils and the like that can be attributed to plants, but are not very extensive or large. But now we had fossils of vascular plants, and moss forests along lakes and streams.

The first terrestrial aniamsl occured, too - the millipede Pneumodesmus, and some arachnoids and myriapod predators as well. Simple food webs, thus, were starting to evolve on land.

Look at what you’ve done - that was a perfectly good millipede. Now you’ve given it predators. Art from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silurian

No vertebrates made it onto the land, but the first bony fish - Osteichthyes, the group that includes us - evolved, so that’s neato. Fish in general started really diversifying, with better jaws and scales. Sea scorpions became very common, some reaching several meters long. Leeches evolved too, and eventually most of the invertebrates regained their diversity from before the extinction, even though trilobites were never as diverse as they were in the Cambrian.

In the end, the changes in ocean nutrients, sea levels, and temperature may have been a driving factor in organisms moving to the land. New niches and ecologies that were less affected by this constantly fluctuating environment would have been beneficial to adapt to. And, given that we’re organisms that live on the land, we sure owe a lot to those first colonizers that made the complex ecosystems necessary for vertebrate land colonization, possible.