Morlark

Literally the entire point of the comment that you're responding to is that it isn't true for the metre, and it isn't true for any SI units.

Your entire claim of tautology rests on the assertion that the speed of light is defined by something external to light itself. That's false. It remains false irrespective of which SI measurements you swap in.

Just because the speed of light can be expressed in terms of SI units, doesn't mean its definition depends on them. Which is the point that wolframhydroxide was making.

This directly disproves your original assertion of tautology.

The numbers are irrelevant. It's just an arbitary scale.

If you were experiencing a pain that's so mild it's basically just a feeling of discomfort, you'd be able to describe that, right? And you it you were experiencing a pain so intense that it has you literally screaming? You'd be able to describe the difference between them, right? Well there's literally a conversion chart that translates those feelings into numbers.

You don't have to conceptualise anything — it's literally printed on a paper for you when they ask you the question. As long as you can experience pain and either read a description of pain severity, or describe your pain severity to someone who can read, you can use a numerical pain scale.

Eh, it's not really similar though. Yes, a lot of what we think of as "taste" is actually perceived via smell. But separately from that, there is actually a phsyiological sensation of taste that is unrelated to smell, i.e. the five basic tastes: sweet, sour, salty, bitter, and savoury.

Whereas there isn't really any meaningful distinction between the sense of acceleration and balance. They're exactly the same sensation, and the mind only knows which one you're actually experiencing by cross-referencing what your other senses tell you. If you're in a situation where these other senses are unavailable, people generally can't distinguish whether they're accelerating or off balance.

This has led to a number of plane crashes in history, in situations where pilots are in dense cloud cover and can't see the horizon. During stressful situations, if they forget to look at the artificial horizon display, they think the plane is pitching up, and therefore try to pitch down to correct, when in fact the plane is accelerating (due to already being pitched down), resulting in a crash.

It's an older meme, but it checks out. This meme is from the peak meme era, circa 2004.

Conventionally, rather than two panels with captions, it's made using four separate image panels. For that reason, the meme format is known as gaijin 4koma. You can search that term to learn more about it. Apparently the guys were IGN reporters.

People complain about the proportional sizing of Mercator but the sense of direction it gives us is completely broken.

With respect, this is silly. People complain about the proportional sizing of the Mercator projection because disproportionate sizing is literally the only problem with the Mercator projection.

The sense of direction being off has got literally nothing to do with Mercator. That's an inherent drawback of trying to project a three dimensional globe onto a 2D image. Literally every single projection has this exact problem, in one form or another. It is considered ot be an acceptable trade-off for not having to work with globes all the time.

Stop looking for yet more baseless reasons to bash the Mercator projection, which is a perfectly reasonable and acceptable projection to use within its intended usecase (which this specific example literally is).

Nissin, but you gotta get the Demae Ramen, not that Top Ramen shit.

People often express this view. And, in practice, it does seem to mostly work that way. But why? There's no reason it should have to. There are many oldschool forum websites where the entire website as a whole has less members than there are subscribers to individual comms on Lemmy. Yet those forums have individual subforums with greater post volume/rate. Why should this be?

I think the problem is that most Lemmings are reddit refugees. They still have reddit-brain. They expect every Lemmy comm to be a constant firehose of content that they can just passively consume, and only occasionally post to. Even though the constant firehose nature of Reddit was largely bot-driven. So when there's no constant stream of content, people incorrectly think the userbase is too small, and check Lemmy less often... which means they post less often, which means there's less content. It's a vicious cycle.

I think people need to come into Lemmy with a healthier mindset. It is a community to participate in, not a feed to be consumed. Lemmy isn't Reddit, and shouldn't try to be.

No. The entire point of the Fediverse is so that no single site can monopolise discussion on a topic. Having multiple communities with overlapping themes is an expected and desired outcome.

And, to that point: the themes are indeed merely overlapping in this case, not identically the same. 'ask gaming' is about asking questions of the gaming community. 'let's talk...' lends itself to more in-depth discussions. They are not the same. There can be no justification for shuttering one in favour of the other.

People keep trying to force there to be 'one single comm to rule them all' for each given topic, as if this is reddit or something. That's literally the exact opposite of the point of the Fediverse.

the rare people who know the difference between i.e. and e.g.

This honestly isn't rare at all, and people who try to flaunt it as some kind of mark of erudition tend to come across as... well, not quite what you intended.

No, it's not you, the joke just doesn't work.

So in other words, the documentary was so successful in decrying the rampant hyperconsumption that was accepted in its time, that such rampant is no longer considered acceptable or normal. And on that basis, you consider it to be facile, obvious... "problematic"?

No shit its conclusions were already obvious to educated people. They were never the target demographic. Literally nobody references Supersize Me as a "study". It isn't, and it hasn't ever claimed to be. It's a shock story to grab the attention of the least well-informed segment of the population. That you're trying to call it out for not succeeding at being something it never claimed to be, and even more so for succeeding at the thing it did try to be, is not a problem with the documentary.

Whenver you come up with similarly hot takes, the comments always end up being filled with a you offering litany of obtuse bad reasoning.