overcast5348
@overcast5348@lemmy.world
- Comment on Jet Fuel 2 months ago:
Okay, I’m convinced. 😂
- Comment on Jet Fuel 2 months ago:
How are China’s stringent lockdowns explained in this conspiracy theory? Also, where do I sign up as a member?
- Comment on Burning Up 2 months ago:
That’s a lot of moved goalposts to justify the weird temperature scale logic but okay. Have a good day! :)
- Comment on Burning Up 2 months ago:
I’m saying that 0F is waaaaaaay more dangerous than 100F so the logic of those particular temperatures being the 0-100 ends of the scale can’t be explained by how dangerous they each are.
Almost everyone would be fine staying outside for 30 minutes at 100F without no external help (shade, cool drinks etc). Almost nobody would be fine after staying outside at 0F without external help (parka, thermals etc).
To me, with absolutely no data, it feels lie:
- 0F is as dangerous as 140F (you’re long dead if you’re outside in both cases)
- 100F is as dangerous as 40F (mildly uncomfortable but safe for a while)
So calling 0F and 100F both “really dangerous” and using that to justify them being the respective points of 0 and 100 disingenuous. Like, use Fahrenheit if that’s what you’re used to - I use it too because that’s what I’m used to. But I don’t explain the insane system with “it’s because the two ends are reallllly dangerous.”
- Comment on Burning Up 2 months ago:
Lmao are you a penguin or something? Please tell me that you’re exaggerating to make a point and aren’t seriously saying that you’re capable of staying warm at -10°C (14°F) “without an additional heat source.”
- Comment on Burning Up 2 months ago:
Fahrenheit: let’s use “really cold weather” as zero and really hot weather as 100.
I don’t really have a horse in this race but this logic doesn’t seem legit to me.
How is -17°C really cold weather AND 37°C really hot weather?
One is actively trying to kill you if weren’t already dead by the time the weather got that bad. The other just makes your nuts stick to your thighs – if you’re in a humid place.
I’d agree with the logic of 100F was equal to something like 65°C. 🤷♂️
- Comment on i will never understand scientific fraud 2 months ago:
- Comment on Could an American please prove me wrong? 2 months ago:
I said “Oooooh right” before you. What now, buddy?
- Comment on Could an American please prove me wrong? 2 months ago:
Oooooh right
- Comment on Oh no! I dropped (5£ to) Anna's Archives. Beware the mess, people. 2 months ago:
Please do no visit piracy@lemmy.dbzero.com
- Comment on Why do people complain about multiple streaming platforms existing? 3 months ago:
Thanks. Yes, something like the music app world be ideal.
- Submitted 3 months ago to [deleted] | 50 comments
- Comment on Interspecies linguistics 3 months ago:
Okay, I’ll bite.
Why isn’t it language? And how do you define that a method of communication qualifies to be called a language?
Also, what would you call a method of communication that lies somewhere in between “follow the pheromones” and “modern human comms”?
- Comment on Flowchart for STEM 3 months ago:
I’ve had this thought for a while and I definitely agree that a lot of software I’ve built is a net negative to society as a whole and the only reason why I get paid as well as I do is because I’m helping rich assholes suck value out of society more efficiently.
For instance, I’ve worked on CMSs that automated 90% of the processes for medium-large insurance companies. Sure, it may result in a marginal price reduction for insureds (lol), but it almost certainly has led to fewer staff being hired to the benefit of the overlords. If more and more middle-class white-collar jobs gets replaced by software, that helps put downward pressure on wages. At the end of it all, are the marginally lower prices worth it to society, when everyone has a lower wage or no well paying job forcing them to participate in the gig economy and such?
It’s a depressing thought, and I’ve been trying to break into research engineering roles or something of the sort to get away from my current role but it’s been an uphill task.
- Comment on Day one and done 6 months ago:
I say that I like “garbage pizza” because that’s how everyone around me treats the pizzas I like. I don’t like the “good pizzas” that everyone keeps raving about. I’ll take Domino’s or Pizza Pizza any day of the week.
- Comment on teachings 7 months ago:
I’m guessing that you were one of those “I won’t ever use all this math” kind of students?
- Comment on *So far* 8 months ago:
Wait, what’s this?
- Comment on I have attempted science. 8 months ago:
Gotcha.
I thought that was the norm in all academia these days? Can a physicist (or anyone from another field) publish results that didn’t go as expected and save future scientists some time?
- Comment on I have attempted science. 8 months ago:
…because people don’t accept that it’s wrong? Or some other reason?
- Comment on Huh 8 months ago:
Tittles are the little dots above i and j, that’s why you weren’t autocorrected. You’re looking for “title” though.
- Comment on there are worse hills to die on 8 months ago:
Monkeys paw = you get what you asked for but it takes a nasty path to get there. Example from the OG story, the parents ask for money, then their son dies, and they get the insurance money.
Genie = chooses to ignore the spirit of the wish and gives you something that technically meets the criteria. Ex: you ask for a “hot chick”, and get a boiling hot baby chicken.
You can try to work around the genie’s trickery with more and more precise wording till there isn’t any ambiguity. The monkey will fuck you over anyway, because fuck you, that’s why.
99.99% of the comments on r/monkeyspaw are just granting wishes like they’re genies and not like they’re a monkey’s paw, and it rubs me the wrong way.
- Comment on brilliant as silver 8 months ago:
Is this the origin story of The Mad Hatter? 🙄
- Comment on Has google stopped working for finding anything? 10 months ago:
SEO itself is fine - it’s just optimising your website website for whatever a search engine considers important.
The problem is that search engines’ seem to have absolutely garbage metrics for what is important and worth it.
- Comment on Has google stopped working for finding anything? 10 months ago:
An example of search engines failing me miserably last month:
I wanted to hire a photographer, so I started searching using keywords like “wedding photographer MAJOR_CITY_NAME”, “photography MCN”, “event photographer MCN”, etc. The top results I got were all mostly along the lines of “top ten wedding photographers in MCN” i.e. listicles with links to a few photographers who probably paid the listicle creator? There were maybe one or two links to a photographer’s website itself in the first page.
I’m okay with ignoring the first page of results and moving on to following pages. But rather than giving me individual photographer’s websites in subsequent pages, I started getting listicles for “top ten wedding photographers in OTHER_CITIES”. I’d click through multiple pages of results to find maybe 5 direct website links.
What actually helped me find a photographers eventually was entering the exact same key words on Instagram. Almost every single one of them that I found on Instagram had an excellent website and the city name, and their addresses were mentioned clearly on their websites. So, it wasn’t a case of them not having enough information on their website. It’s just that search engines chose to prioritise listcles of photographers from other cities rather than giving me links to individual websites of photographers in my own city.
In this case, I got lucky because photographers have a presence on Instagram which has a functional search engine. What if I want to find a plumber, or someone else? I’m forced to just trust a listicle creator because search engines don’t want to give away links to single purpose websites and only want to keep us on websites with a shit ton of content (that may or may not be what you need) and ads.
/rant
- Comment on The Jebus Said So. 10 months ago:
Your mom never existed.
- Comment on I love purple. 11 months ago:
Magic is purple! * Throws chair *
- Comment on Roman numerals, man... so close! 1 year ago:
69 isn’t “the funny” number because it’s an ambigram. It’s the “funny number” because it’s the sex position number.
You’re one of that’s 10000: xkcd.com/1053/ :)