Why do we like blowing bubbles?

(This is not a bitcoin thread, go away)
1/

So I'm not a “neurotypical” (a fact discovered late in life) and while we won't go into the details here, the net output of that fact appears to be that I'm wired to take a more… ‘zoological’ approach to understanding humanity.

Hence the quirky Animal Planet threads.
2/
The distance afforded by non-participation in certain things (the weakness) also occasionally lends itself to a bit more subtlety with pattern detection (the strength).

And so I started painting a picture about bubbles.
3/
And in my mind’s eye there formed a cluster of ladybugs. They were happy, far from from eating aphids, and content on their beautiful tree.

And then one started flapping.
4/
At first the other ladybugs ignored it, but after a time its persistence was intoxicating.

And so a few more flapped.

And as is the way with exercise, certain endorphins were released

And it felt good to flap.
5/
And before long the tree was like the ladybug equivalent of CrossFit: everyone was doing it and getting hella jacked.

The tree was abuzz, and the energy was bright and intoxicating.
6/
But a few ladybugs didn't flap. They didn't like this new thing because they didn't understand it - the flapping had no logic.

But the flapping wasn't about logic, it was about feeling good.

So the non-flappers were wrong, in a way.
7/
For some time things continued this way, and much joy was produced by the flapping.

Except for the non-flappers, who still just ate their aphids and did their non-flappy things.
8/
And then autumn came, and with it a beautiful crispness.

But the aphids were less plentiful.

And so the flapping began to feel less good, for there was less fuel for it.

And the buzzing dimmed.
9/
And before long the ladybugs, more focused on sustenance, had ceased flapping altogether.

While most of the ladybugs rushes around in a provisioning frenzy, the non-flappers were calm, still fat with their stored energy.
10/
And as these things go, the non-flappers declared that they had been right all along.

Clearly non-flapping had been the prudent, safer play.
11/
But were they right?

Foe they also had missed out on the beautiful euphoria of the flap, stoically sacrificing it for a calmer, more serene experience over time.

Perhaps in the end such things are a matter of appetite.
12/
And that's what makes a market.
/13
Oh hey - we're gonna talk about bubbles and such on @RealVision soon!

Stay tuned; some fun stuff lined up.

More from Travis Kimmel

More from Life

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?