Aspergers and memory – part 1: ‘sequencing’

During the past few months, I have not been writing about Aspergers because I have been doing a bit of reading up about it – there is so much ‘food for thought’ in the feedback to my earlier posts on Aspergers (thank you all) that I just had to check some things out.  Of course, not all my curiosity has been satisfied – but I think that I have learned things that have helped me make a little bit of sense of some ‘Aspie patterns’.

The one thing I have read about the most is memory.  And if you Google it, there actually are quite a few studies about Aspergers and Memory out there – so I, an Aspie (and definitely NOT an expert) am not the only one to suspect that one of the ways Aspies differ is in the way our memory works.

The conclusions of the studies were unsurprising:  Aspie memory works slightly differently. 

Yes, there were IQ tests as part of many of these studies to ensure that Aspies and ‘others’ of ‘similar’ intelligence were compared.  Some looked at adults, others at kids or teens.  (Many studies I read looked at Aspies vs. Autistics, but  that is a different story.)  (Frank admission:  while I read some studies completely, others I only read the ‘hypothesis’, the ‘methodology’ and ‘conclusions’ sections.  This was not from slacking or taking shortcuts, but because I really wanted to read many different studies, from different areas, looking at different age groups, run with different goals, so as to get a glimpse of the ‘big picture’ and the patterns within it. )

Here is where I must warn you:  the scientific studies I read made observations and conclusions.  Various studies, various observations and conclusions.  What follows here is my interpretation of the conclusions of several of these studies.  It is NOT any opinion (as far as I know) of a professional in this field.  These are my higly subjective ideas, so, please, treat them as nothing more than such.

Several of the studies had (with variations) presented a list of words which the people had a chance to read several times (or, variously, study for a given time period), and then had to repeat in the same (or reverse) order.  The Aspies usually remembered fewer of the words from the list than their peers.  Now, here is the intereseting bit:  they were absolutely terrible at putting the words into the proper order!

This immediately made me think of the very high incidence of dyslexia and ‘hearing dyslexia’ (Auditory Processing Disorder (APD)) in Aspies.  I may have it backwards, but it sounds to me like this difficulty in ‘putting things into order’ is a pattern:  sounds, letters and words cannot be ‘remembered’ in the ‘right order’….  But with APD, the science tells us it is a problem in ‘perception’. 

So, I reasoned, perhaps this is a general ‘processing’ difference of the brain itself.  Perhaps this is not a simple ‘memory’ function.  Perhaps this is telling us something about the overall processing that the brain does – and how an Aspie brain does it differently.

Or it could be a memory function – but the memory fails very, very early on. 

Let’s consider hearing:  our ears sense vibrations, which are translated into a neural impulse.  This impulse travels into the bit of the brain which makes sense of the sound, and sends the ‘translated’ information to other bits of the brain, as required.  For example, if it determines a sound to be ‘words’, it might send the message to the ‘language’ section of the brain.  But, is all of this instantaneous?

In many people it is.  But I don’t think this is in any way universal.  For example, I know several people who can hear me say something and completely fail to react to it.  When I ask them what I said, they look thoughtful and then repeat word for word what I had said.  Yet, until they were requested to repeat the words, they were completely unaware that they had even heard them.

It’s as if the phrase were held in some sort of a ‘buffer’, completely preserved and perfectly remembered, but not deciphered by the brain.  Only when this ‘buffer’ was consciously accessed did the brain actually get access to the information in it.  This suggests to me that in-between the different ‘processing’ stages, the brain must hold the information in some sort of a memory slot. 

And if the Aspie memory has a predisposition to ‘jumbling up’ the order of sounds (or pictures) it is holding on to, it could explain all of these.  Jumbled up sounds, pictures, order of words.  All of it.

Or, it could be something completely different.  Yet, I have received so many messages from people, asking for more of my observations about Aspergers – as well as offering me their perspectives about what I wrote – that I thought that even though I really am not sure what it all means, putting this observation ‘out there’ might be a good idea.

This way, I hope, many of you will share your own experiences in this and together, perhaps, we can make more sense of this!

Let’s Roll

Particularly fun day at CERN

turn-on

xkcd: 'turn-on'

Today, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in CERN was turned on!

How exciting!

Despite the dire predictions of ‘generating black holes which will end our Universe’ – predictions which were accompanied by death threats, something most physicists are not used to and unexplicably find mildly funny – things would appear to have gone relatively well!  I guess science’s search for interactions between  Truth and Beauty continues!  (Well, at least scientists expect to see SUperSYmmetry (SUSY) ).

From today’s xkcd (above) and the ‘Scott Adams Blog’ which gives advice to all the bosons our there on ‘Nerdy pick-up lines’, it seems that events like these would appear to open up the horizons to an increase in puns among certain demographics….

Currieous!

P.S. – special mention to the person who can find all the puns in this post….there may be a few.

Email I got about ‘carbon tax’

With the election call up here in Canada, we have been just bombarded with opinion polls, telling us what we think.  Do we really think what the pollsters tell us we think?

I was rather surprised that today, my very ‘I’ll have nothing to do with politics – don’t tell me about it – I cant’ hear you -la-la-la-la’ mom actually sent me a political email!  It is one of them that are circulating about…

Since I don’t know the ultimate source, I do not know if it is correct, I don’t even know if the alleged author is a real person – it seems to me there are at least two authors here:  that is not really my point.  My point is more about the very fact that apolitical Canadians, those ‘sit-back-and-tax-me-I-won’t-complain’ Canadians, are actually passing around this (and similar) emails and believing them.

 As in, this may or may not be ‘right’, but it is what many ‘apolitical Canadians’ are thinking…

 

Carbon Tax  
 
The author of this, John Coates, lives in Nova Scotia. He would be even more disgusted if he lived here in BC where we already have a Carbon Tax .

The Liberals Carbon Tax

Politicians have, in the past, used that old bullshit phrase of ‘cutting taxes’ to get you to vote for them.  
 

Now, Stéphane Dion, has come up with a new wrinkle on that old lie :  

  • Tax your heating oil and anything else you burn to move your food and everything else that you have always had in your life… but, he’ll lower your income taxes.

CONSIDER THIS from one person who has bothered to do the homework:

When a politician’s lips move, I know he’s probably lying. Mr. Dion says his carbon tax will be revenue neutral. So, I went online and found a carbon calculator and keyed in the annual energy consumption for our household and learned we produce 17 tons of greenhouse gas. Fully 60% of this usage is for electricity which we use to heat our home.

I have already improved insulation in my walls and replaced my windows and doors; use the new ‘twirley’ lights and ensured that my appliances are all Energy Star products. In the past 20 years, these measures reduced my electricity usage from 24,000 Kw Hrs per year to 16,000 Kw Hrs per year last year.  
 
What is my reward for this improved efficiency?

  • My power bill is unchanged from what it was 20 years ago.  
  •  But, my power bill would  attract  a carbon tax of $104 in year one of Mr. Dion’s plan  
  •  and $ 416 in year four.  
  • My power bill would rise from $166 per month to $210 per month in year four.

Since I live on a fixed income consisting of CPP and Old Age Security, my income tax bill runs at less than $200 per year. So, for my household, Mr. Dion’s ‘revenue neutral’ carbon tax will cost me $416 per year less income tax reductions of about $10 per year.

Revenue neutral? In a pig’s eye! This is a tax on seniors living on fixed incomes.  
 
Well, Mr. Dion, you haven’t got a snowball’s chance in hell of ever getting my vote. I hope everyone else takes five minutes to run the same calculations I did and vote to send this joker to the political boneyard.

 SIGNED:   Jon C. Coates – 70 Ridgevalley Rd. – Halifax, N.S. – B3P 2J9

Factual data substantiating this:

  • 16.96 tons
  •  60% of this is for electricity or 10.4 tons/year
  •  @ $10/ton in year 1 = $104 or $9/mo
  •  @ $20/ton in year 2 = $208 or $18/mo
  •  @ $30/ton in year 3 = $312 or $27/mo
  •  @ $40/ton in year 4 = $416 or $40/mo
  •  Income tax paid is $110/yr.

DON’T BUY INTO THE CARBON TAX !
DON’T BELIEVE ANY POLITICIAN FROM ANY PARTY!
PASS THIS ON TO EVERYONE IN YOUR ADDRESS BOOK IN CANADA.



At first I thought this was funny…then I realized the awful truth of it.

Be sure to read all the way to the end
 

The Tax Poem
 

Tax his land,  Tax his bed,
Tax the table,  At which he’s fed.
Tax his tractor,  Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes,  Are the rule.

Tax his work,  Tax his pay,
He works for peanuts,  Anyway!
Tax his cow, Tax his goat,
Tax his pants, Tax his coat.

Tax his ties, Tax his shirt,
Tax his work, Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,  Tax his drink,
Tax him if he  tries to think.

Tax his cigars, Tax his beers,
If he cries, Tax his tears.
Tax his car,  Tax his gas,
Find other ways  to tax his ass.

Tax all he has, Then let him know,
That you won’t be done, Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers, then tax him more,
Tax him till he’s good and sore.

Then tax his coffin,  Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in which he’s laid.
Put these words, Upon his tomb,
‘Taxes drove me to my doom…’

When he’s gone,  Do not relax,
Its time to apply…..

The Inheritance Tax
Accounts Receivable Tax
Airline Surcharge tax
Airline Fuel Tax
Airport Maintenance Tax
Building Permit Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Death Tax
Dog License Tax
Driving Permit Tax
Employee Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment (UI)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Gasoline Tax ( too much per litre)
Gross Receipts Tax
Health Tax
Hunting License Tax
Hydro Tax
Inheritance Tax
Interest Tax
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Mortgage Tax
Personal Income Tax
Poverty Tax
Prescription Drug Tax
Property Tax
Provincial Income Tax
Real Estate Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Retail Sales Tax
Service Charge Tax
School Tax
Telephone Federal Tax
Telephone Federal, Provincial and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Water Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax …..

 
STILL
THINK THIS IS FUNNY?

  • Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago,  
  • our nation was one of the most prosperous in the world.
  • We had absolutely no national debt,  
  • had a large middle class,  
  • and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

What in the hell happened????

Can you spell ‘politicians’????

I hope this goes around CANADA at least 100 times!!!!!  
YOU can help it get there!!!!

GO AHEAD – – – be a CANADIAN !!!!!!!!!!  
 
SEND IT AROUND TO EVERYONE AND CHANGE IT !!!!

 

So, have we, Canadians, finally been taxed out of our complacency?
 

Journalists and elites

Societies change.  That is natural and to be expected.  And as they do, who makes up the ‘elites’ also changes.  While I think that observing the patterns in societal changes may be interesting all on its own, it may also help us predict the future patterns of change.

A while ago, the ruling class was determined by family affiliation:  in order to raise an army to conquer a country with, a person had to belong to a royal or, at least, an aristocratic family.  Same for succession.  Well, usually! 

This has changed.  The patterns of how and why are complex and more suited to a book than a simple blog post.  Let it suffice to say that looking at today’s elites, it appears that most of their members do not have pretentions to royal bloodlines.

So, whom are todays elites made up from?

Aside from the celbrities (why they are ‘famous elite’ is a whole different post), today’s elites can be (very roughly) divided into two general groups:  ‘rich elites’ and ‘intellectual elites’.  (Looking at the infinite nuances of their sub-casts would take another book…so let’s stick with the ‘big’ differentiation.)

The rich elites are often marked by the pretentions of past nobility:  ‘familly money’ individuals often look down on the ‘nuveau-riche’ as ‘upstarts’.  But, especially in the US, where personal achievement is not yet regarded as a bad thing, the rich can all be lumped together under the general label of ‘rich elites’.  Especially by the second generation…

The intellectual elites are a lot more interesting:  these people have no pretentions to being able to actually do something.  Instead, they see themselves as the ‘thinkers’ of society.  It is not sufficient to be highly educated and very intelligent in order to be part of the ‘intellectual elite’ – scientists, for example, would satisfy these criteria, yet they are most certainly not politically influential.  They get patted on their heads, warmly welcome (for a little while) if they can be temporarily useful, but then they get locked back in their labs.  So, what is that quality?

Unsurprisingly enough, to be a member of the ‘intellectual elite’, one has to appear to fit in comfortably with the ‘rich elite’.  This ‘fitting in’ could be an ostentatiously overdone ‘poor look’ (like the ‘bohemians’ that many University Professors used to affect while it was fashionable), but underneath, one must be able to act rich, rich, rich!  

This immediatelly rules out those who are unpretentious – keeping up fake appearances is simply not attractive to unpretentious people.  Now, since our Universities and Colleges have, to a great degree, been staffed by professors who typically hold radically socialist views, it is not surprising that those who wished to be admitted to these ‘intellectual elites’ had to affect similar manners and assimilate these very political views.

So, the group which emerges as being most politically influential (other than the ‘old rich elites’ – as in, old-money  families) is made up of pretentious, radical socialists!  In Canada and the US, we easily recognize them as our ‘Liberals’ and ‘Democrats’…

But, where do the journalists fit in?  They, most certainly, are not even now rich enough to be admitted to either of the ‘elites’ of today!  Yet, in Journalism schools, they were subjected to radical socialist teachings.  And, now, they are sent to cover the lives and actions of the two elites.  Is is surprising, then, that getting to know these people as individuals during the course of their work, the journalists (who, like all of us, wish to be ‘special’ and ‘extraordinary’) have come to identify themselves with one of these two elites?

Unless born or married into a rich family, a journalist cannot hope to fit in with the ‘rich elite’.  That is just a simple economic fact – even the best newspapers do not pay that well.  However, many of them can and do fit in comfortably with the ‘intellectual elites’.  Well, sort of.  At least, they are much closer – close enough that from the point of view of the journalists, they feel like they fit in.

And while there may be some crossover, at least in the USA, the ‘rich elite’ is traditionally associated with the pro-business Republicans while the ‘intellectual elite’ tends to be associated with the socialist Democrats.  The rest of us mortals fall into one or the other camp, based on what we think is a better way to organize a society:  based on individual achievement or on group-rule.  (In Canada, the ‘rich elite’ is almost non-existant, so the ‘Conservative’ party only retains the image of ‘old money’, rather than embodies it – but despite the facts, the image remains.  The ‘intellectual elite’ in Canada is split between the ‘Liberal’ and ‘New Democratic’ parties).

Is it surprising, then, that when covering ‘their own’ elite, the journalists of the MainStream Media find themselves ‘cheering’, and while when covering ‘the other elite’, they are incessantlly booing?

All right, so I don’t have a revelation here, or much of a real point of any kind.  But, watching this particular pattern is interesting, is it not?

Candidate for …

Here, in Canada, we are likely to have an election soon.  How do I know?

Yesterday, a nice looking gentleman knocked on my door and introduced himself as a candidate in my riding.  Since no election has indeed been called yet, I asked him:  

‘A candidate in what?’ 

He replied:  ‘For the Liberal Party’.

To explain: the sitting Prime Minister (PM) is presiding over a minority  Conservative government.  That means that he cannot pass legislation unless some of the oposition parties – like the Liberal Party, the New Democratic Party, Block Quebecois or the Green Party.  The PM is claiming he might have to ask the Governor General to disolve the Parliament and call an election, because the oposition parties are not willing to talk – and so the legislature is at a stalemate.

The Opposition Leader and head of the Liberal Party, Stephane Dion, is claiming that calling an election now would be prepostrous, that things are working just fine and that no election is necessary.  In fact, he claims that calling an election would be just the PMs whim!  Nobody, according to Mr. Dion, wants or needs an election now – except Mr. Harper, the PM.

OK, so this is the situation: 

  • the Liberals claim they don’t want an election and say we don’t need one 
  • no election had been called
  • a Liberal candidate is knocking on my door

Which is why I had asked him ‘A candidate in WHAT’?

….he was equally as swift on the uptake during the rest of our conversation.  And, yes, I pick on all political candidates, without regard to party, age, sex, and so on.  Most have learned to avoid my door.  This guy was new, I guess.

So, why are the Liberal candidates ‘hitting the streets’ if they are all so convinced there is no need for an election?

‘You’re pretty fat!’

Out of the mouths of babes!

Recently, I spent some time with my ‘old friend’ and her delightfully honest daughter.  She (the young daughter) informed me that my hair was shiny and looked pretty, that she liked my dress, and that I was ‘pretty fat’. 

I thanked her for her compliments.

It seems strange to me how many people negate young children’s honest observations, and attempt to devalue them! 

OK, ‘years ago’, my friend and I were both quite pretty.  Yet, as we had kids, I had turned into a ‘mama bear’ while my friend had grown into a ‘foxy mama’!  Yes, we have words for women like that! 

Yet, that is not my point.

My point is how we treat ‘honesty’ – especially the type of honesty which comes from the mouths of babes.  My friend’s daughter is pre-school aged, yet her mom looked uncomfortable when her daughter had made a true – even if ‘touchy’ – observation!  Yes, she was relieved I was not hurt or offended – but how could I possibly be hurt or offended by the honesty of a child?

To my friend’s credit – she may have looked ‘uncomfortable’, yet she did not try to stop her daughter from speakng her mind.  I applaud all parents who let their kids speak the truth – even if it is ‘socially uncomfortable’!  Yet, among parents, she in the minority…

Has our society fallen so much that a child saying ‘The Emperor has no clothes’ would be shushed and shut up by it’s ‘politically correct’ parents?

If so, that is a truly sad state of things…for if a child dare not speak the truth, who will?

A father’s asks for prayers for his son

Even though we form a virtual community, the people whom it is made up of are real, genuine, flesh-and-blood individuals.  For better or worse, we all have our pleasures and troubles. 

This is a touching story from one member of our virtual community, whose son is about to undergo a difficult cancer surgery.  He only asks that we keep his son in our thoughts or prayers.

I cannot pray.  But, I assure you, David ben Yaacov will be in my thoughts! 

David, I wish you all the best! 

P.S. If you would like to send a card, please send it to David at the Second Draft PO Box 590591, Newton Centre, MA 02459.  The family is not asking for money, just the support of positive thoughts and prayers!

‘Cooperation’ is to ‘Collaboration’ like ‘Hippies’ are to ‘Yuppies’

Sometimes, things nag at me.

‘Buzzwords’ ‘bug’ me in general, the buzzword ‘collaboration’ bugs me in particular.

Being a slow thinker, I have wondered for years now why I even care.  And, yes, I do flinch every time I hear it used….’collaborative efforts’ sets up a whole tick of flinches!

But, why?

The obvious reason is the pejorative connotation ‘collaboration’ has in all the European countries once occupied by Nazi Germany.  Collaborators were those who sought to improve their individual circumstances by working alongside (co-labour-ating) the oppressive occupational forces through (and this is key in my mind) harming others.  Growing up, there was no ambiguity in morality:  ‘collaborators ought to be lined up along a wall and shot’. 

Of course, that is not the only meaning in which the term is used.  Is there something else about ‘collaboration’ that I am almost – but not quite – picking up on here? 

Perhaps a good starting place is to contrast ‘collaboration’ to its ‘predecessor buzzword’, ‘cooperation’.  The dictionary definition is – excepting the whole ‘lining collaborators up against the wall’ thingy – somewhat similar…yet slightly different.  Some dictionaries list them as synonyms, others define ‘collaboration’ as ‘directed cooperation’…  Many people more qualified in this than I have done excellent analysis of the difference in meaning from one discipline to another (some are mutually quite exclusive)…

What about cultural connotations, who uses the words, and to what end.  Could I find a clue there?  Perhaps…

The ‘old’ buzzword, ‘cooperation’, has a decidedly ‘Kumbaya’ feel about it…  It is all about caring and sharing and stoning anyone who isn’t already stoned into cooperating with, like, nature, and people, and, like, stuff. 

But it is also evocative of super-exclusivist intellectuals, like those who wear Birkenstock sandals (those non-conformists!) and set up ‘condominium co-operatives’ where they insist on interviewing potential condo buyers to make sure they are ‘suitable’ kinds of people to ‘cooperate with’.  They are open-minded, of course – ‘minority status’ is a bonus, so long as they have the right ideology and score high enough on the ‘pretentiousness scale’.

And it also makes one think of some more ‘proletarian’ forms of ‘cooperation’, usually called ‘co-ops’.  These would be ‘co-operatives’ set up to ‘help’ a specific class of people – say, farmers.  These tend to be incredibly inclusive:  as in (here in Canada), they successfully lobied governments to make it illegal for someone – like, say, a farmer – to farm UNLESS they were a member of the cooperative.  Papa Stalin would have been so proud!

From ‘Milk’ and ‘Egg’ and ‘Wheat’… these took on names like ‘Marketing Board’ and – strictly to protect the farmers and assure a ‘fair’ wage for their work – set out manipulating produce prices by setting quotas to limit production.  ‘Member’ farmers then have to buy a ‘quota’ and are forced to destroy any produce above this – or the ‘inspectors’ will destroy their means of production.  It is so strict that a chicken farmer is not allowed to bring a chicken she grew to her son’s barbecue… for removing the chicken from the premises and allowing ‘others’ to consume it with her, she could be stripped of her production quota. 

Now, THAT is SOME protection ‘cooperation’ can provide!

Marx had seen human cultures as forming a closed circle:  starting with a ‘primal collectivism’ in the earliest dawns of human civilization, through various stages like feudalism, capitalism and socialism, all the way to ‘advanced collectivism’ (I am translating these terms, never read this bit in English – sorry if it is not in ‘usual terms’…it is, however, in accurate terms.)  ‘Advanced collectivism’ is, of course, synonymous with ‘communism’.

So why does the word ‘collaboration’ make me cringe even more?

Perhaps because ‘cooperation’ is to ‘collaberation’ like ‘hippies’ are to ‘yuppies’!

It is ‘self-centred’, ‘task-oriented’, ‘mean, lean and cold’.  Still just as pretentious – especially among the ‘condo people’.  Which is where the whole ‘WWII collaboration’ meaning comes in.  No, don’t invoke the ‘Goodwin law’, not like that…  Just that whatever the evils of ‘coerced cooperation’ may be, there is at least a ‘lip service’ paid to ‘improving’ and ‘community building’.  It still hold the idea – as wrong as this is – that whatever the means, there will be a common good that will come out of this.

‘Collaboration’ shakes these illusions.  Yes, is also is ‘working together’ but not like a team – more like cogs in a machine!

It is strictly business!  No social benefits, no community building, no ‘common goals’.  We have a ‘task’ here, you do your bit, I’ll do mine. Don’t bother trying to build an infrastructure from which other ‘stuff’ could grow – we don’t have funding for that.  Just build your widget – I don’t care how or whom you hurt in the process – and hand it over to the next guy in line!

I suppose it is a sort of a ‘modern day production line’, except without the robots.

Like ‘cooperation’, ‘collaboration’ is less and less a matter of choice and more and more a matter of coersion.  It has all the negative aspects of ‘cooperation’ (except the campfire songs – no time for that), yet more dehumanizing…. 

Oh, yes, we are all pulling ‘together’, but not as a team… it’s each collaborator for him/her self!

Where ‘cooperation’ was (in its infancy) a reaction to a controlling society, an attempt to band together to stand up to ‘big business’, ‘collaboration’ is the ‘next evolutionary step’.  It is – in every sense of the word – ‘bureaucratization’ of ‘cooperation’.  Just think about it for a while – it really is.

Which brings me to the WHO: Who are the people most fond of this buzzword?

Bureaucrats of all stripes! 

Oh, they don’t see themselves as bureaucrats!  They are ‘educators’, ‘intellectuals’ and ‘professionals’!  Except that….they’re not.  They could have been – but instead of ‘teaching’ and ‘discovering’ and ‘achieving’, they are busy ‘defining the process’ and ‘implementing best practices’ (controlling the process) and going to important meetings to tell other important people about their latest ‘best practices’… bureaucratizing!

Collaborators, the whole bunch of them!

Do you know a ‘knol’?

Wikipedia, look out! 

Google has launched its ‘Knol’ – a site wchich is somewhat similar, though promises to be more ‘Google monitored’, as a rival repository for popular knowledge.   I cannot wait to read some of their write-ups.

Just a quick search showed that -as yet – there is no entry on the Canadian Human Rights Commissions!  Gee, I wonder who would be best qualified to write it up?

Somebody ought to give Mr. Levant a heads-up!

(via TheReferenceFrame)