Roman Ladder

Photo

Mon, 20 May 2013 21:45:11 -0700

lizzybean76: earthandanimals: gothic4l: earthandanimals: goth...

Sat, 11 May 2013 09:23:17 -0700

earthandanimals:

gothic4l:

earthandanimals:

gothic4l:

kitchenkind:

gothic4l:

kitchenkind:

gothic4l:

kitchenkind:

gothic4l:

kitchenkind:

I deleted this because of anon hate, but you know what? I dont care.
This is my boyfriend. Hes a Marine heading to Afghanistan.
Sometimes hes my reason for sanity.
Sometimes hes the reason for my insanity.
And im immensely proud of how happy we look (even if the sun is blinding us) because the past few months, with him going through predeployment training a million states away, and me going through my daily stressors and mental/physical health concerns, have been so difficult and we’ve stuck through it together despite all odds.

you didn’t earn that cover,TAKE IT OFF.

Okay, I was going to ignore this, but it seriously bothered me so let me make a couple points:

Hi, if you would have taken the time to read the little thing I added with the photo, you would have learned that I previously posted this but had to delete it because I got a lot of hate. That said, don’t you think its incredibly rude to reblog my photo and add hate onto it, or tell me what to do?

Which brings me to point two: You do not know me and I do not know you. You do not know my relationship with my Marine, and likewise, I don’t know your relationship with yours.
Your Marine may feel its completely wrong for a significant other or non-Marine to wear any article of uniform, hey, that’s fine, I understand that completely. The thing is, I wasn’t impersonating a Marine or trying to portray myself as the same rank/status as my significant other, I was just having fun. I put the cover on for a split second to take a few photos. Then I took it off.

Point three is really for any MILSOs following me: Don’t be this girl. Don’t be the woman that is so bitter about everything and so stuck up and up tight that she has her husband’s EGA lodged so far up her anus she cannot seem to function. Don’t rain on other people’s parades. You don’t know their story or their situation or the relationship they share. Don’t be rude. My Marine and I are happy. This photo shows it. When other people are so bold as to reblog it and tell me to take his cover (that’s his hat, for all you non-military followers) off, it’s not only taking away MY happiness, it’s making you look like a complete idiot.

Newsflash, You’re completely right, I am not a Marine! I didn’t earn a cover, or an EGA!! But guess what sister, neither did you, so stop acting like you’re the MILSO Police and lighten up. It’s a photo on the internet of a couple you’ve never met. My gut instinct tells me you wouldn’t tell a girl at the birthday ball to take off a Marine’s cover for a photo op, so why are you telling me? (And hey, if you actually would, you have balls, congrats, but still see above where: YOU AREN’T THE MILSO POLICE.)

In conclusion: This photo is for fun. My relationship is fun. You don’t know me. Stop being pretentious.

Lolololol your “Marine.”

“My Marine,” is my husband. I do not call him “my Marine.”

That is the huge difference between you and I, I do not reference him to being my “Marine,” or hero or any other reference. He is my husband. I do not have my husbands EGA “stuck up my ass,” because I respect him that he chose to go through 3 months of hell to earn his title. He is extremely proud of himself and what he has gone there, I am no way shape or form taking that title away from him using his cover, or anything else, to “look cute” in a photo.

Whenever I see couples wearing their SO’s uniform, I can’t help but laugh. It is so disrespectful. I am definitely not alone on this one. I am not the MilSo police, I do not go looking for these photos. I follow a couple military SO’s directed blogs and occasionally I see photos such as this. I cannot even fathom how some one thinks this is cute.

Knowing someones relationship or story does not retrain to any of this. That does not count as a “excuse” for such a disrespectful photo.

The guts to tell someone to take the cover off? Lololol. I wouldn’t have to tell that person because someone else would.

Its not cute, its not adorable, its not fun. Its pathetic and extremely disrespectful.

You took this photo off for hate, and put it back on. Expect to get hate, it is the internet. You are basically asking for it.

I dont have the time or energy to fight you on this because ive made myself clear in the previous reblog, and i feel everything ive said still stands, so ill say this and then walk away: Im agreeing to disagree with you. Have a great life, please refrain from reblogging anything else I have to post or say.

Have a good life with your “Marine.”

Okay bitch now you fucking asked for it.
Why the quotation marks? Do you doubt his dedication to his country because he allows me to wear his cover for a photo? Hes just as good as your husband. Show some fucking respect. Have fun with your “life.”

Lolol oops

have fun with “your Marine”

This is probably the most ridiculous “argument” I’ve ever come across. WHAT THE FUCK IS THE PROBLEM WITH HER WEARING HIS MARINE HAT? HOLY FUCK. For the love of Satan give me a GOOD reason why this is wrong or how it’s disrespectful? Obviously her husband seems to be completely okay with it so why you care so much about this is mind boggling.

A person goes through 3 months of the hardest basic military training in America, a person goes through 3 phases. Please educate yourself here & here here as well. That is not all what boot camp consists on, google some more if you would like to know more.

A recruit goes through 12 weeks of boot camp to earn his title of a Marine and to earn his EGA, eagle globe anchor. The title of Marine is NEVER given, it is always earned has been that way since 1775.

Wearing her BOYFREIND’s COVER is extremely disrespectful because she didn’t earn that one bit.

It is called a COVER.

Did she say “Fuck yeahh I’m a marine too biiiiitch!”? No. Therefore she does not claim to be one. Clearly her husband is not offended in any way shape or form. I for one do think this is a cute photo and I do have respect for them military as well. This is just not neccessary to argue over ya know? Now everyone hug it out! :D

Let’s see…it’s his cover, he earned it, and HE wants her to wear it! Get the fuck over it already.

Wow, can I give give this a bigger eye roll? I think it’s a cute photo. Whatevs.

"It turns out, then, that this is not just an internet problem. A textbook education in cartography..."

Wed, 17 Apr 2013 08:48:17 -0700

“It turns out, then, that this is not just an internet problem. A textbook education in cartography will not teach you, in scientific terms, why a choropleth Mercator map is worse than a choropleth sinusoidal map or a proportional symbol map. Interpretation of area in quantitative maps gets no quantitative explanation; instead it gets basically the same treatment as propaganda maps and the whole Peters thing, which paraphrased boils down to “bigger things totally look more prominent and important because they’re bigger.” Semiology of Graphics is the only book I have that really addresses size directly and as matter of fact—noting among other things that “it is not possible to disregard it visually” and “in any map representing areas of unequal size, what is seen is [quantity] multiplied by the size of the area”—but even if he was correct, Bertin was pretty much making things up. Mentioned more commonly but no more deeply explained is the need to normalize data to account for area in choropleth maps, i.e., not mapping counts. Considering this rule, the projection requirement, and a host of “ideal” enumeration unit characteristics, choropleth mapping just starts to sound like a terrible idea for anything at all. Size variation that is not directly related to numerical variation seems to cause nothing but problems. Danny Dorling’s arguments for cartograms and mapping human phenomena in human space, not geographic space, start to sound appealing. Too bad cartograms are also kind of awful.”

- Andy Woodruff (via roomthily)
This is good stuff, something that’s always bothered my about choropleth maps but I haven’t been able to put my finger on. Too bad most of my GIS career has been in making them.

Old setup: Core2Duo iMac New setup: Quad Core i7 Mac...

Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:56:18 -0700

Old setup: Core2Duo iMac

New setup: Quad Core i7 Mac mini

Woohoo!

My IKEA Rule

Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:09:22 -0700

I have a rule about IKEA, which is this:

“Never buy anything at IKEA that you will not or cannot assemble/install/put in its place the very same day.”

I have a certain luxury that this is a practical rule for me; not only is there an IKEA in my home metro area, but it is actually doable to visit during my lunch break during the week. So, I can go back another day for things I know I won’t get to today.

The reason for the rule is that in my experience anything that doesn’t get immediately acted upon will go into that wasteland called “the garage,” to be a “future project.” I don’t need the clutter, I don’t need the mental weight of projects hanging out there unfinished. And, tastes and plans change. I’ve got a ceiling light out there from five years and a house move ago, and it doesn’t really have a place in our lives now.

By only getting things I will use right away, I can prevent wasteful purchases and unnecessary clutter in my home.

This rule might not be practical for those who like IKEA, but can only go occasionally, and must therefore “stock up,” but it can apply to Target, Home Depot, or anywhere housewares are sold.

My preciousssss…

Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:31:12 -0700

My preciousssss…

lovefigures: A clothing store in Sweden has introduced curvy...

Thu, 11 Apr 2013 08:14:11 -0700

lovefigures:

A clothing store in Sweden has introduced curvy mannequins that better reflect the average women’s body shape. If something like this catches on it has the power to change the whole fashion industry.

The more we reblog this, the more pressure we’ll put on the industry to change their skinny obsessed ways.

I’m going to send a link to this post, and the original one on Facebook, to every fashion brand contact I have - so let’s show them how much this matters!

A big thanks to Women’s Rights News for bringing this to light.

Follow LoveFigures for more body positive inspiration

No argument here. Real women FTW!

On Chasing the Right "Zero"

Wed, 10 Apr 2013 12:54:52 -0700

merlin:

Not to be all “Merlin Mann” or anything, but, maybe somebody will find this useful.

I was recently asked to talk about how I think about the infamous Inbox Zero these days, and here’s what I said:

Read More

From one of the smartest men I’ve ever met.

"As they embrace computer-assisted methods and Geographical Information Systems, the scientistic..."

Wed, 10 Apr 2013 08:16:40 -0700

“As they embrace computer-assisted methods and Geographical Information Systems, the scientistic rhetoric of map makers is becoming more strident. The ‘culture of technics’ is everywhere rampant. We are told that the journal now named The American Cartographer will become Cartography and Geographical Information Systems. Or, in a strangely ambivalent gesture toward the nature of maps, the British Cartographic Society proposes that there should be two definitions of cartography, “one for professional cartographers and the other for the public at large.” A definition “for use in communication with the general public” would be “Cartography is the art, science and technology of making maps”: that for ‘practicing cartographers’ would be “Cartography is the science and technology of analyzing and interpreting geographic relationships, and communicating the results by means of maps.” Many may find it surprising that ‘art’ no longer exists in ‘professional’ cartography. In the present context, however, these signs of ontological schizophrenia can also be read as reflecting an urgent need to rethink the nature of maps from different perspectives. The question arises as to whether the notion of a progressive science is a myth partly created by cartographers in the course of their own professional development. I suggest that it has been accepted too uncritically by a wider public and by other scholars who work with maps. For those concerned with the history of maps it is especially timely that we challenge the cartographer’s assumptions. Indeed, if the history of cartography is to grow as an interdisciplinary subject among the humanities and social sciences, new ideas are essential.”

- J.B. Harley, Deconstructing the Map

preach

(via susannathinks)

maphugger: Screenshot from: David Paliwoda/Jesse Williams - How...

Mon, 08 Apr 2013 15:44:47 -0700

maphugger:

Screenshot from: David Paliwoda/Jesse Williams - How Far is it to Mars? (2013)

A lot of attempts have been made to give a sense of scale to our solar system, but this one wins my vote for portraying that the most effectively.

http://www.distancetomars.com/

oneofthepaths: The Five Types of Territorial Morphology sounds...

Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:42:20 -0700

oneofthepaths:

The Five Types of Territorial Morphology sounds like a fun parlour game, at least in cartophile circles (is Portugal compact or elongated? Is or isn’t Somalia prorupt? Does New Zealand qualify as fragmented?) But there is a serious, geopolitical concern behind this attempt at classification. For a country’s shape has a profound impact on its economic success, and even its political viability. (via 595 - It’s Always Chile in Norway: the Five Types of Territorial Morphology | Strange Maps | Big Think)

This is covered in Geography 101, literally. Sweet!

wtfqrcodes: …and please lick a stamp while sending a fax, which...

Tue, 26 Mar 2013 08:01:16 -0700

wtfqrcodes:

…and please lick a stamp while sending a fax, which will deploy a bike messenger who will then send a telegram with instructions to release the carrier pigeons…

I love MechaGodzilla!

Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:55:21 -0700

I love MechaGodzilla!

A reaction to Start Trek Into Darkness International Trailer

Sun, 24 Mar 2013 10:39:01 -0700

lizzybean76:

bilbosexual:

reichenfeels:

carry-on-wayward-assbutt:

radculas:

can the sherlock fandom not ruin star trek likes it has ruined the hobbit thanks

can the various fandoms stop being elitist and just fucking accept that there is going to be some good natured crossovers and stop sounding like pretentious douches trying to keep one fan group away from another fan group? thanks.

^THIS^

SO VERY MUCH ^THIS^

"… maps aren’t ‘facts of nature’. They are artefacts people have created to do things with, artefacts..."

Sat, 23 Mar 2013 15:48:14 -0700

“… maps aren’t ‘facts of nature’. They are artefacts people have created to do things with, artefacts with almost ritualistic functions. Maps are used to establish the real. They’re profoundly performative.”

- Denis Wood, The Anthropology of Cartography (via susannathinks)
There is no such thing as an unbiased map.