53
submitted 2 days ago by Merlu@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Qkall@lemmy.ml 31 points 2 days ago

i got into an argument with my in law about a 60$ sticker to block the 'waves' on my phone. for my health. and my phone will still work.... it was a hologram sticker.

[-] xilliah@beehaw.org 6 points 1 day ago

I've got the new ones that also block radiation, they're on sale for 120$

[-] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

well, they do sell ones that work. you can measure them blocking all em radiation from exiting out the back of your phone... instead blasting all of it into your head. significantly more of it too, since the normal reaction of a phone that loses signal is to boost its own in order to find a tower.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] pappabosley@lemm.ee 11 points 2 days ago

Whether if something is deceptively [a trait] does it mean it's the inverse of the trait or more of the trait than it appears, ie: if you call something deceptively shallow, does that mean it is shallow, but looks deep, or that it is deep but looks shallow. Hours of arguing with my family and checking numerous sources, we came to the conclusion that the phrasing can be used either way.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

An event that happens biweekly could occur at the same frequency as an event that happens bimonthly.

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Shouldn't that be semi-monthly? Rounding months to 4 weeks, of course.

Or maybe that's just me wanting bi and semi to have consistent meanings. Bi is two, semi is a half.

load more comments (1 replies)

I think if something is described as deceptively shallow it means that it looks deeper than it is. IMO

[-] tetris11@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

Goddamit. I was so certain it was the inverse, and now here I am debating myself

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] davel@lemmy.ml 25 points 2 days ago
[-] runiq@feddit.org 5 points 2 days ago

Holy butts, that was the good kind of bonkers

[-] platypode@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 days ago

Or if you’d prefer it in video form: https://youtu.be/eECjjLNAOd4

[-] ClipperDefiance@lemmy.world 27 points 2 days ago

My mom was playing Jeopardy on her Alexa and one of the questions was about a state in Mexico. Her boyfriend, who was very drunk, adamantly insists that it's a trick question because "Mexico doesn't have states." It's literally called the United Mexican States. Two of my aunts are from Mexico. It took like two hours to get him off the subject.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] xilliah@beehaw.org 8 points 1 day ago

That the whole transgender thing is a conspiracy by the healthcare sector to earn more money.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] pr06lefs@lemmy.ml 22 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

the one where the democrats are the 'party of slavery' because of what the parties stood for in 1860. yeah that's why I'm voting for Lincoln and the union this year dumbfucks

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 days ago

And yet California—a solidly blue state—just voted by public referendum to uphold slavery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_California_Proposition_6

[-] Alice@beehaw.org 3 points 1 day ago

Yeah, the problem here is calling them the party of slavery, when both parties are blatantly in favor of it.

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 1 day ago

I wonder why so many Democrats left the party during the civil rights movement? I wonder why David Duke left the Democrat party? I guess we'll never know.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

They might want to look up how the parties flipped during the civil rights era.

[-] Soulifix@kbin.melroy.org 9 points 2 days ago

Anytime I enter one with a purist/gatekeeper. You just can't reason with them and they absolutely refuse to see the other side of the argument. They must always believe that their direction is the direction for all things regarding X fandoms or general hobby.

[-] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Or people who are pedantic.

"The sky is blue."

"No it isn't! It is red at sunrise and at sundown."

"Ok comic book guy."

[-] spongebue@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Kinda related, I studied in Spain for a semester. Was taking with my fellow American roommate about the debate of if a tomato is a fruit or vegetable. Our host mom's daughter's boyfriend (Cuban, fwiw) overheard, and we told him about the "controversy" in the US but all 3 of us agreed it was a fruit. Host mom overheard us and asked what we were talking about, and the Cuban told her. "Well yeah, of course it's a vegetable"

I couldn't understand every word but when I could tell they were arguing about some vegetables having seeds or something like that I knew I spread something.

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 3 points 1 day ago

All fruits are vegetables, not all vegetables are fruits. All edible plant matter is vegetable. Fruits are, well, the fruit of a plant.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

Fruits are the reproductive organs of plants designed to be eaten by other animals in order to spread their seeds.

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago

Right, the fruit of the plant is what we consider fruit.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

You'd be surprised how little that definition helps when someone insists a tomato is not a fruit.

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago

I mean, they're clearly thinking about sweet versus not sweet. The discussion isn't really about what a tomato is and isn't, it's about what the words mean and how they're using them. There's no doubt about what a tomato is. Everyone has a clear understanding about it. It's just that people mean different things when they say it is/isn't a fruit. People saying it isn't a fruit say that because it isn't sweet. Which is fine, there's nothing wrong with that. But if they're disagreeing that a tomato is the fruit of a tomato plant then they're being foolish. And I don't think anyone is saying that.

Whenever people are arguing about this it's just so exhausting because they'll hear something like "a tomato is a fruit" or that "all fruits are vegetables" and rather than try to seek understanding about how the other party is using the words they just dig their heels in and insist that's wrong. When the whole reason they're upset is because they're picturing their own usage of the terms and imagining the other person saying a tomato is that.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] ace_garp@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

So dumb.

Hour argument, that the final cliff fall scene in Predator 1 was two different jumps in the 2 cuts.

Can see in the first one he is rotating. Second cut is a straight plumb drop into the water.

How were the rotational moments counteracted?

They weren't, it's two different jumps/takes.

2 friends came up with some hair-brained arguments that you could stop rotating on the way down. (눈_눈)

The only way would be air resistance, and hands/arms is not going to be enough to create drag to counter the rotation.

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 3 points 1 day ago

I hate when people get into minute arguments about what is visually happening on screen versus the story that's being told. It can be a single jump narratively but two jumps in production. (I've never seen the movie.)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Whether 12:00:00 is a period of time and could be AM or PM, or whether it was a point in time i.e., the meridian, and was neither AM nor PM.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

12:00:00 exists in both AM and PM. I have my lunch at 12 PM.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 9 points 2 days ago

ugh. gotta be the one about jesus preaching pacifism. The person said the turn the other cheek was not to be taken literally but a thing he says after he admonishes a disciple for cuting off a soldiers ear and healing the ear but then he says his fight is yet to come and he will need to be armed and armored for it. that he feels is literal and not prose at all. smh.

[-] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 2 days ago

Whether the saying is “if they think that, then they’ve got another think coming” or “if they think that, then they’ve got another thing coming”.

[-] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 6 points 1 day ago

That one always gets me. The phrase means that the person is wrong about something, and circumstances will compel them to reconsider their position or opinion. The word "think" refers to a cognitive process, such as reconsidering their position or opinion. As for the alternative, what's the "thing" that's coming? Their latest Amazon order is out for delivery?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 10 points 2 days ago
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2025
53 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

44274 readers
484 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS