college boys be shady. fuck being too respectful for my own good

phon3y:

I laughed so hard I woke up my dad.

tastefullyoffensive:

Anatomy of Songs [wronghands]

"Date someone who is interested in you. I don’t mean someone who thinks you’re cute or funny. I mean someone who wants to know every insignificant detail about you. Someone who wants to read every word you write. Someone who wants hear every note of your favourite song, and watch every scene of your favourite movie. Someone wants to find every scar upon your body, and learn where each one came from. Someone who wants to know your favourite brand of toothpaste, and which quotes resonate deep inside your bones when you hear them. There is a difference between attraction and interest. Find the person who wants to learn every aspect of who you are."

Anonymous (via kushandwizdom)

beautiesofafrique:

BLACK IN ASIA

Thailand

The Mani people are the original homo sapiens that travelled from Africa and settled in Thailand. They are the original negaritos who moved with other Africans like Andamanese of India, Aetas of Philippines,Semangs of Malaysia  to their present  residence in Thailand. They were there before the other ethnic groups came to form the Thai kingdom. Anthropological studies has revealed that the Thai Mani and Malaysian Semang were the first modern humans to enter the Malay peninsula. They remarked that "the original people of the Malay Peninsular that about 4,500 years ago the Proto-Malays moved south from the Yunnan province area of China into Southeast Asia where they met the Negritos who, for a long time, may have been the only modern humans to live in this area" 

The name Mani is of Mon-Khmer origin and means “human being,” and they speak Tonga language. The Mani or “forest people” as other Thai people call them lives in  the jungles of southern Thailand, in the Banthad Mountain Chain and around the Malaysian border in the provinces of Trang, Phatthalung and Satun.  They are facing extinction and currently their total population is about 300. The Banthad Mountain chain became a base area for communist insurgents during the 1970s and thus a battle ground between communist guerillas and Thai government forces. Especially during the years of 1975-1977, the insurgents were battered in ground and air attacks. The Mani suffered terribly during this war with government forces frequently mistaking the smoke of Mani camp fires for insurgent activity. Those living in Trang and Phatthalung provinces had to move to the sanctuary of Thoungwan district in Satun province.

image

image

image

The Philippines

 The Aetas  are the aborigines of the Philippines who were called negritos by the Spaniards at the time of their reign in the Philippines because of their darker skin color. It is the tribe inhabiting the eastern parts of Luzon and called in different names: Agta, Ita, Ati, or Aeta. About 20,000 of them are spread throughout the country. Their majority can be seen in Pampanga and Zambales while others inhabit the coastal fringes of Northern Luzon, and the mountains of Negros, Samar, Panay and Leyte. As a result of their nomadic life, they live in houses built out of grass and tree branches to easily vacate upon scarcity of surrounding food.

Aeta according to anthropologists and archeologists, are descendants of the earliest settlers of the Philippines. They were predicted to migrate in the country through land bridges that connects the country to Asian mainland 30,000 years ago. It may have occurred when the Malay Peninsula was still connected with Sumatra and other Sunda Islands. Their boundless journey around the Malay Peninsula that spread as far as The Philippines resulted to their widespread existence in the country

image

image

image

Malaysia

 The Semang are a Negrito ethnic group of the Malay Peninsula. Lowland Semang tribes are also known as Sakai, although this term is considered to be derogatory by the Semang people. They are the indigenous peoples of this area.They have been recorded to have lived in Malaysia since before the 200s Common Era (CE). They are ethnologically described as nomadic hunter-gatherers.

The Semang live in autonomous local bands consisting of an elder male (usually the leader of the group), his wife, their sons, and the sons’ wives and children. Their religious beliefs are complex and include numerous deities. Shaman-priests practice magic, foresee the future, and cure illness.

image

Semang (Jahai) ethnic group woman of Malaysia

image

image

image

Read More/ Sources 1| 2| 3| 4

"All great and precious things are lonely."

John Steinbeck, East of Eden (via bookmania)
ijustmightt:

i would love to wake up to the sound of the ocean, the smell of a salty breeze; wrapped in comfy blankets next to a man with an adventurous heart.

ijustmightt:

i would love to wake up to the sound of the ocean, the smell of a salty breeze; wrapped in comfy blankets next to a man with an adventurous heart.

neurosciencestuff:

Choice bias: A quirky byproduct of learning from reward
The price of learning from rewarding choices may be just a touch of self-delusion, according to a new study in Neuron.
The research by Brown University brain scientists links a fundamental problem in neuroscience called “credit assignment” — how the brain reinforces learning only in the exact circuits that caused the rewarding choice — to an oft-observed quirk of behavior called “choice bias” – we value the rewards we choose more than equivalent rewards we don’t choose. The researchers used computational modeling and behavioral and genetic experiments to discover evidence that choice bias is essentially a byproduct of credit assignment.
“We weren’t looking to explain anything about choice bias to start off with,” said lead author Jeffrey Cockburn, a graduate student in the research group of senior author Michael Frank, associate professor of cognitive, linguistic, and psychological sciences. “This just happened to be the behavioral phenomenon we thought would emerge out of this credit assignment model.”
So the next time a friend raves about the movie he chose and is less enthusiastic about the just-as-good one that you chose, you might be able to chalk it up to his basic learning circuitry and a genetic difference that affects it.
Modeled mechanism
The model, developed by Frank, Cockburn, and co-author Anne Collins, a postdoctoral researcher, was based on prior research on the function of the striatum, a part of the brain’s basal ganglia (BG) that is principally involved in representing reward values of actions and picking one. “An interaction between three key BG regions moderates that decision-making process. When a rewarding choice has been made, the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNc) releases dopamine into the striatum to reinforce connections between cortex and striatum, so that rewarded actions are more likely to be repeated. But how does the SNc reinforce just the circuits that made the right call? The authors proposed a mechanism by which another part of the subtantia nigra, the SNr, detects when actions are worth choosing and then simultaneously amplifies any dopamine signal coming from the SNc.”
“The novel part here is that we have proposed a mechanism by which the BG can detect when it has selected an action and should therefore amplify the dopamine reinforcing event specifically at that time,” Frank said. “When the SNr decides that striatal valuation signals are strong enough for one action, it releases the brakes not only on downstream structures that allow actions to be executed, but also on the SNc dopamine system, so any unexpected rewards are amplified.”
Specifically, dopamine provides reinforcement by enhancing the responsiveness of connections between cells so that a circuit can more easily repeat its rewarding behavior in the future. But along with that process of reinforcing the action of choosing, the value placed on the resulting reward becomes elevated compared to rewards not experienced this way.
Experimental evidence
That prediction seemed intriguing, but it still had to be tested. The authors identified both behavioral and genetic tests that would be telling.
They recruited 80 people at Brown and elsewhere in Providence to play a behavioral game and to donate some saliva for genetic testing.
The game first presented the subjects pictures of arbitrary Japanese characters that would have different probabilities of rewards if chosen ranging from a 20 percent to 80 percent chance of winning a point or losing a point. For some characters, the player could choose a character to discover its resulting reward or penalty, whereas for others, its result was simply given to them. After that learning phase, the subjects were then presented the characters in pairs and instructed to pick the one they thought had the highest chance of winning based on what they had learned.
The researchers built the game so that for every character a player could choose, there was an equally rewarding one that had merely been given to them. On average, players showed a clear choice bias in that they were more likely to prefer rewarding characters that they had chosen over equally rewarding characters they had been given.
Notably, they exhibited no choice bias between unrewarding characters suggesting that choice bias emerges only in relation to reward, one of the key predictions of their model. But they wanted to test further whether the impact of reward on choice bias was related to the proposed biological mechanism, that striatal dopaminergic learning is enhanced to chosen rewards.
The genetic tests focused on single-letter differences in a gene called DARPP-32, which governs how well cells in the striatum respond to the reinforcing influence of dopamine.
People with one version of the gene have been shown in previous research to be less able to learn from rewards, while people with other versions were less driven by reward in learning.
“The reason why this gene is interesting is because we know something about the biology of what it does and where it is expressed in the brain,” Frank said. “It’s predominant in the striatum and specifically affects synaptic plasticity induced by dopamine signaling. It’s related to the imbalance by which you learn from really good things or not so good things.
“The logic was if the mechanism that we think describes this choice bias and credit assignment problem is accurate then that gene should predict the impact of how good something was on this choice bias phenomenon,” he said.
Indeed, that’s what the data showed. People with the form of the gene that predisposed them to be responsive to big rewards also showed more choice bias from the most strongly rewarded characters. Interestingly, the other people also showed choice bias, but more strongly for those characters that were more mediocre. This pattern was mirrored by the authors’ model when it simulated the effects of DARPP-32 on reward learning imbalances from positive vs. negative outcomes.
For some people, the plums are sweeter if they picked them.

neurosciencestuff:

Choice bias: A quirky byproduct of learning from reward

The price of learning from rewarding choices may be just a touch of self-delusion, according to a new study in Neuron.

The research by Brown University brain scientists links a fundamental problem in neuroscience called “credit assignment” — how the brain reinforces learning only in the exact circuits that caused the rewarding choice — to an oft-observed quirk of behavior called “choice bias” – we value the rewards we choose more than equivalent rewards we don’t choose. The researchers used computational modeling and behavioral and genetic experiments to discover evidence that choice bias is essentially a byproduct of credit assignment.

“We weren’t looking to explain anything about choice bias to start off with,” said lead author Jeffrey Cockburn, a graduate student in the research group of senior author Michael Frank, associate professor of cognitive, linguistic, and psychological sciences. “This just happened to be the behavioral phenomenon we thought would emerge out of this credit assignment model.”

So the next time a friend raves about the movie he chose and is less enthusiastic about the just-as-good one that you chose, you might be able to chalk it up to his basic learning circuitry and a genetic difference that affects it.

Modeled mechanism

The model, developed by Frank, Cockburn, and co-author Anne Collins, a postdoctoral researcher, was based on prior research on the function of the striatum, a part of the brain’s basal ganglia (BG) that is principally involved in representing reward values of actions and picking one. “An interaction between three key BG regions moderates that decision-making process. When a rewarding choice has been made, the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNc) releases dopamine into the striatum to reinforce connections between cortex and striatum, so that rewarded actions are more likely to be repeated. But how does the SNc reinforce just the circuits that made the right call? The authors proposed a mechanism by which another part of the subtantia nigra, the SNr, detects when actions are worth choosing and then simultaneously amplifies any dopamine signal coming from the SNc.”

“The novel part here is that we have proposed a mechanism by which the BG can detect when it has selected an action and should therefore amplify the dopamine reinforcing event specifically at that time,” Frank said. “When the SNr decides that striatal valuation signals are strong enough for one action, it releases the brakes not only on downstream structures that allow actions to be executed, but also on the SNc dopamine system, so any unexpected rewards are amplified.”

Specifically, dopamine provides reinforcement by enhancing the responsiveness of connections between cells so that a circuit can more easily repeat its rewarding behavior in the future. But along with that process of reinforcing the action of choosing, the value placed on the resulting reward becomes elevated compared to rewards not experienced this way.

Experimental evidence

That prediction seemed intriguing, but it still had to be tested. The authors identified both behavioral and genetic tests that would be telling.

They recruited 80 people at Brown and elsewhere in Providence to play a behavioral game and to donate some saliva for genetic testing.

The game first presented the subjects pictures of arbitrary Japanese characters that would have different probabilities of rewards if chosen ranging from a 20 percent to 80 percent chance of winning a point or losing a point. For some characters, the player could choose a character to discover its resulting reward or penalty, whereas for others, its result was simply given to them. After that learning phase, the subjects were then presented the characters in pairs and instructed to pick the one they thought had the highest chance of winning based on what they had learned.

The researchers built the game so that for every character a player could choose, there was an equally rewarding one that had merely been given to them. On average, players showed a clear choice bias in that they were more likely to prefer rewarding characters that they had chosen over equally rewarding characters they had been given.

Notably, they exhibited no choice bias between unrewarding characters suggesting that choice bias emerges only in relation to reward, one of the key predictions of their model. But they wanted to test further whether the impact of reward on choice bias was related to the proposed biological mechanism, that striatal dopaminergic learning is enhanced to chosen rewards.

The genetic tests focused on single-letter differences in a gene called DARPP-32, which governs how well cells in the striatum respond to the reinforcing influence of dopamine.

People with one version of the gene have been shown in previous research to be less able to learn from rewards, while people with other versions were less driven by reward in learning.

“The reason why this gene is interesting is because we know something about the biology of what it does and where it is expressed in the brain,” Frank said. “It’s predominant in the striatum and specifically affects synaptic plasticity induced by dopamine signaling. It’s related to the imbalance by which you learn from really good things or not so good things.

“The logic was if the mechanism that we think describes this choice bias and credit assignment problem is accurate then that gene should predict the impact of how good something was on this choice bias phenomenon,” he said.

Indeed, that’s what the data showed. People with the form of the gene that predisposed them to be responsive to big rewards also showed more choice bias from the most strongly rewarded characters. Interestingly, the other people also showed choice bias, but more strongly for those characters that were more mediocre. This pattern was mirrored by the authors’ model when it simulated the effects of DARPP-32 on reward learning imbalances from positive vs. negative outcomes.

For some people, the plums are sweeter if they picked them.