TO BE HOPEFUL in bad times is not just foolishly romantic. It is based on the fact that human history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness.
What we choose to emphasize in this complex history will determine our lives. If we see only the worst, it destroys our capacity to do something. If we remember those times and places—and there are so many—where people have behaved magnificently, this gives us the energy to act, and at least the possibility of sending this spinning top of a world in a different direction.
And if we do act, in however small a way, we don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.

Howard Zinn (via feellng)

T F m
December 28, 2014

hawaii-5-no:

alltheselittlevoices:

haleepls:

hold-a-lover-close:

owlturdcomix:

We go forward.

This is too deep to comprehend.

Stop it

I THOUGHT THIS WAS GOING TO BE FUNNY

WHY?!
WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS TO US?!?¿?!


T F m
December 26, 2014

Video games are Not making us more violent, study shows | Technology | The Guardian

Video games are Not making us more violent, study shows | Technology | The Guardian


T F m
December 26, 2014

The news van kit struck her as really quite different. She does not have children, so the change in LEGOs represented by the Friends line was startling: “In 1981,” explains Giordano, “LEGOs were ‘Universal Building Sets’ and that’s exactly what they were…for boys and girls. Toys are supposed to foster creativity. But nowadays, it seems that a lot more toys already have messages built into them before a child even opens the pink or blue package. In 1981, LEGOs were simple and gender-neutral, and the creativity of the child produced the message. In 2014, it’s the reverse: the toy delivers a message to the child, and this message is weirdly about gender.”


T F m
December 26, 2014

anniewerner:

“We can’t assume loving a boy band prevents a girl from thinking critically about her experiences and the experiences of others. Don’t assume teenagers can’t understand complex social theory. Pay attention to teenage girls; they just might change the world.”

Ferguson, One Direction, Tumblr, and Why You Need to Pay Attention to Teenage Girls — TheLi.st @ Medium — Medium (via libawr)


T F m
December 26, 2014

We can’t assume loving a boy band prevents a girl from thinking critically about her experiences and the experiences of others. Don’t assume teenagers can’t understand complex social theory. Pay attention to teenage girls; they just might change the world.


T F m
December 26, 2014

We can’t assume loving a boy band prevents a girl from thinking critically about her experiences and the experiences of others. Don’t assume teenagers can’t understand complex social theory. Pay attention to teenage girls; they just might change the world.


T F m
December 26, 2014

Kevin Sutcliffe, Vice’s head of news programming in Europe, says mainstream TV networks wrongly assumed young people weren’t interested in foreign news. The problem “was the worn-out approach, with newscasters, tight packages, and live feeds from Washington. The world is a rough, raggedy place, and young people want journalism that reflects that. They want authentic close-up reporting, less packaging, less mediation.” Vice News has racked up more than 160 million video views and has one million YouTube subscribers, evidence, Sutcliffe says, that the 30-and-under crowd will flock to foreign news if it’s delivered in an edgy and immersive way.


T F m
December 25, 2014

The Humane Representation of Thought
from Bret Victor: Closing keynote at the UIST and SPLASH conferences, October 2014.
Preface: worrydream.com/TheHumaneRepresentationOfThought/note.html
A beautiful discussion for where we need to aim our ideas for the future of interaction with technology.


T F m
December 23, 2014

A Letter from our Editor-in-Chief Tom Lutz

lareviewofbooks:

All of us at the Los Angeles Review of Books felt great sadness last week at the news that The New Republic was falling apart. TNR had been losing $3 million a year, but had, people thought, been rescued by an internet billionaire. There isn’t a serious magazine editor out there who wouldn’t like an internet billionaire to drop like manna out of the sky — running an independent magazine in the age of digital media isn’t easy: the very internet that produced such billionaires has destroyed the traditional revenue model for magazines like ours.

That magazines like The New Republic, and Harpers, and LARB lose money is no secret. The Paris Review has an endowment and is funded in part by donations. Harper’s gets funded — to the tune of some $4.5 million a year — by a foundation. Literary magazines already needed non-commercial funding before the digital revolution hit, but things are more dire now that analog dollars have shrunk to digital dimes.

LARB now produces a greater quantity of serious work now than any of these venerable outlets, and we have managed to do it on a tiny fraction of their budgets. We’ve achieved this remarkable feat because of the volunteer labor of many, and because people have opened their wallets and opened their homes to hold fundraisers for us, written reviews and essays for nothing or next to nothing, done pro bono legal and technical work for us, and otherwise chipped in to build this remarkable home for cultural exchange.

Harpers was, in the 1890s, such a powerful cultural and commercial force that it almost single-handedly moved the center of literary production from Boston to New York. Now it needs a cash infusion of millions of dollars to survive. We want it to survive, and we want LARB to survive. There is currently no foundation underwriting LARB and no billionaire. We’ve pulled this off so far with the help of everyday readers like you.

We are halfway home in this, our largest fund drive to date — halfway to matching the $75,000 we stand to earn if we raise that same amount. If we make it, the $150,000, 1/30th of the Harpers figure, will keep us going into the new year.

We cannot do it without you. Unless, that is, between now and Dec. 31 an internet billionaire drops from the sky. But we’d much rather have 75,000 readers do it instead.

Please consider donating today. Help us prove that in the new digital age, all that is required for independent publishing to stay alive and well is a community of everyday readers determined to keep it that way.

Sincerely,

Tom Lutz

LAReviewofBooks.org/matchinggrant


T F m
December 22, 2014