Author | Lightnews

Amarok

@amarokyote.bsky.social

690 followers 670 following 340 posts

3D character modeller/animator | Neurodivergent | 30 | New York | Somewhat🔞 Linktr.ee/amarok9

Posts Media Videos Starter Packs

Pinned

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · Feb 1

Thylacine: Extinct Boy VRChat avatar A brand new avatar built from the ground up! This carnivorous marsupial is ready to cause mischief! Check them out here: amarok9.gumroad.com/l/extinct-boy

2 9 39

Reposted by Amarok

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 21d

Part 2 of the last doodle I did. Now with 3/4 angle
#furry #furryart #art #digitalart

3 30

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 3d

Wow didn't know theres a database! This very useful thanks!

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 4d

cute uwu

Reposted by Amarok

E C M @ecmajor.bsky.social · 4d

people actually 1: /use/ pinterest?!?? and 2: find it critical enough to their lives that they need workarounds to make it less rife with ai crap even though stealing and gatekeeping images is basically its whole purpose???????
i don't understand it and never will
i hate pinterest so much...

Akane ⚔️🫀 DTIYS pinned! @akanelogics.bsky.social · 12d

‼️ REMOVE AIslop from your PINTEREST results.‼️
Let's see how true this is....

1. Go to ‘Refine your recommendations’ and remove everything related to ‘generative AI interests’.

(As if anyone who visits the site for reliable references would be interested in that...)

6 3 32

Reposted by Amarok

🦇 :V džej V: 🦇 @jaylacine.bsky.social · 6d

da boys are adventuringgg

9 40

Reposted by Amarok

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · Mar 11

Every once in a while I'll see people on here talking about their Twitter account. WHY is anyone still using Twitter at this point unless you like Elon or you favor follower count over your values. Come y'all, you can leave Twitter. It cost nothing to do, I promise...

1 7

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 10d

OOOWW! I love the art!

Reposted by Amarok

dilith 🎃 @flurrys.nekoweb.org · 10d

i mean idk man I feel like being on a more boring site beats this

230 880 5K

Reposted by Amarok

Dulse Yeen @yeen.paw.bs · 11d

14 490 1.5K

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 11d

Pets them 👋

Reposted by Amarok

Santiago Mayer @santiagomayer.com · 12d

Spotify is now running recruitment ads for ICE.

It’s time to cancel your account.

170 1.7K 3.2K

Reposted by Amarok

Socks the Macro Wolf Dad @socksthewolf.com · 22d

Windows 10 End of Life is in less than 2 weeks!
But you don't have to upgrade to Windows 11!!

This video will show you how to extend the life of Windows 10 by 3 more years via Extended Security Updates program safely, for free.

MS throws you to the wolves, but the wolves will throw you a bone.

220 4.5K 8.9K

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 18d

Do you think windows will crack down on this exploit
in the future?

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 19d

Im going to ANE! It definitely feels more chill than bigger cons.

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 21d

Part 2 of the last doodle I did. Now with 3/4 angle
#furry #furryart #art #digitalart

3 30

Reposted by Amarok

Mythic 🦊 @mythicalredfox.bsky.social · 22d

I cracked open Sartre's famous essay on anti-Semitism the other day, and the very opening pages discuss how clearly absurd it is to treat such things as merely discourse, as merely "opinions."

A 77 year old work, & yet Sartre's writing still meet the present moment better than most newspaper op-eds

If a man attributes all or part of his own misfortunes and those of his country to the presence of Jewish elements in the community, if he proposes to remedy this state of affairs by depriving the Jews of certain of their rights, by keeping them out of certain economic and social activities, by expelling them from the country, by exterminating all of them, we say that he has anti-Semitic opinions.

This word opinion makes us stop and think. It is the word a hostess uses to bring to an end a discussion that threatens to become acrimonious. It suggests that all points of view are equal; it reassures us, for it gives an inoffensive appearance to ideas by reducing them to the level of tastes. All tastes are natural; all opinions are permitted. Tastes, colors, and opinions are not open to discussion. In the name of democratic institutions, in the name of freedom of opinion, the anti-Semite asserts the right to preach the anti-Jewish crusade everywhere.

At the same time, we look upon persons and characters as mosaics in which each stone coexists with the others without that coexistence affecting the nature of the whole. Thus anti-Semitic opinion appears to us to be a molecule that can enter into combination with other molecules without undergoing alteration. A man may be a good father and a good husband, a conscientious citizen, highly cultivated, philanthropic, and in addition an anti-Semite. We say, it is because his experience has shown him that they are bad, because statistics have taught him that they are dangerous, because certain historical factors have influenced his judgment. Thus this opinion seems to be the result of external causes, and those who wish to study it are prone to neglect the personality of the anti-Semite in favor of a consideration of the percentage of Jews who were mobilized in 1914, the percentage of Jews who are bankers, industrialists, doctors, and lawyers, or an examination of the history of the Jews in France since early times. They succeed in revealing a strictly objective situation that determines an equally objective current of opinion, and this they call anti-Semitism, for which they can draw up charts and determine the variations from 1870 to 1944. Anti-Semitism appears at once a subjective taste that enters into combo with other tastes to form a personality, an impersonal and social phenomenon which can be expressed by figures and averages, one which is conditioned by economic, historical, and political constants.

I do not say that these two conceptions are necessarily contradictory. I do say that they are dangerous and false. One may approve or condemn the import of wine from Algeria: here we have a case of an opinion on the admin of things. But I refuse to characterize as opinion a doctrine that is aimed directly at particular persons and that seeks to suppress their rights or to exterminate them.

The Jew whom the anti-Semite wishes to lay hands upon is not a schematic being defined solely by his function, as under administrative law. He is a Jew, the son of Jews, recognizable by his physique, by the color of his hair, by his clothing perhaps, and, so they say, by his character. Anti-Semitism does not fall within the category of ideas protected by the right of free opinion.

It is something quite other than an idea. It is first of all a passion. The "moderate" anti-Semite will tell you quietly "Personally, I do not detest the Jews. I simply find it preferable that they should play a lesser part in the activity of the nation." But a moment later if you have gained his confidence he will add "There must be something about the Jews; they upset me physically."

This argument, which I have heard 100 times, is worth examining. First of all, it derives from the logic of passion. Can we imagine anyone's saying seriously "There must be something about tomatoes, for I have a horror of eating them"? It shows us that anti-Semitism in its most temperate form remains a syncretic whole which may be expressed by statements of reasonable tenor, but which can involve even bodily modifications. Some men are suddenly struck with impotence if they learn from the woman with whom they are making love is a Jew. There is a disgust for the Jew, just as there is a disgust for the Chinese or the Negro among certain people. Thus it is not from the body that the sense of repulsion arises, since one may love a Jew very well if one does not know what her race is; rather it is something that enters the body from the mind. It is an involvement of the mind, one so deep-seated and complete that it extends to the physiological realm. This involvement is not caused by experience. I have questioned a hundred people on the reasons for their anti-Semitism. A young actor without talent insisted that the Jews had kept him from a successful career in the theater by confining him to subordinate roles.

A classmate of mine at the lycée told me that Jews "annoy" him because of the thousands of injustices that "Jew-ridden" social organizations commit in their favor. "A Jew passed his agrégation the year I was failed, and you can't make me believe that that fellow understood a poem by Ronsard or an eclogue by Virgil better than I." But he admitted that he disdained the agrégation as a mere academic exercise, and that he didn't study for it. Thus, to explain his failure, he made use of 2 systems of interpretation, like those madmen who, when they are far gone in their madness, pretend to be the King of Hungary but, if questioned sharply, admit to being shoemakers. His thoughts moved on two planes without his being in the least embarrassed by it. As a matter of fact, he will in time manage to justify his past laziness on the grounds that it really would be too stupid to prepare for an examination in which Jews are passed in preference to good Frenchmen. Actually he ranked 27th on the official list. There were 26 ahead of him, 12 who passed and 14 who failed. Suppose Jews had been excluded from the competition; would that have done him any good? Even if he had been at the top of the list of unsuccessful candidates, even if by eliminating one of the successful candidates he would have had a chance to pass, why should the Jew have been eliminated rather than the Norman or the Breton? To understand my classmate's indignation we must recognize that he had adopted in advance a certain idea of the Jew, of his nature and of his role in society. And to be able to decide that among 26 competitors who were more successful than himself, it was the Jew who robbed him of his place, he must a priori have given preference in the conduct of his life to reasoning based on passion. Far from experience producing his idea of the Jew, it was the latter which explained his experience. If the Jew did not exist, the anti-Semite would invent him.

1 43 110

Reposted by Amarok

🐾 BrushDog 🖌 @brushdog.bsky.social · 26d

@oktoberswoods.bsky.social
is this a joke? You weren't banned because you said ''cringe'' on my page -- you were banned because you've been targeting and harassing my friends & I since *June* -- you've drawn and posted multiple artworks of you harming/threatening and even beheading us,

1 4 30

Reposted by Amarok

Kry @kryotea.bsky.social · 28d

feather puppy !

2 19 100

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 25d

Its baffling how dumb people can be sometimes. Honestly, I dont know what to say about folk like this. Some people simply have no idea how to distinguish between real and AI conent and thats so scary.

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 25d

A algaegators

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 25d

It costs nothing to mind your own business. No one is being harmed, and no laws are being broken. Worry about your own art and stop this weirdo behavior.

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 26d

Have you tried just deleting the blueprint id component and adding it back?

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 26d

I love gradients uwu

Amarok @amarokyote.bsky.social · 29d

Using only images, explain why you're a furry

5 11

Reposted by Amarok

Sophie Labelle @assignedmale.bsky.social · Sep 23

Charlie Kirk never cared about debates.

4 frame comic. First frame we see a tent and a crowd. text reads : Charlie Kirk didn't hold debates on college campuses. What he was organizing were flash mobs where his supporters rallied at colleges to create ideal conditions for drama. 2nd frame, someone is speaking at a mic while people with red caps are holding phones up. text reads: Students who dared to stand up to him were facing a sea of hostile faces. The goal was to make them feel vulnerable to get good footage out of them. 3rd frame, we see the person from the 2nd in a youtube thumbnail. text reads : clips were then edited and clickbait thumbnail created to drive the highest engagement possible. the game was rigegd from the onset. 4th frame, we see a silhouette of Kirk. text reas: Charlie Kirk was "winning every debate" because there was no debate. It was a campaign to radicalize young men and purposefully make campuses unsafe to women and minorities.

36 1.1K 2.6K