I don't have a source for it, but I recall hearing that yes, their eyes work at a different speed than ours, and that's part of why cats and dogs are generally not so interested in TV. Unfortunately I don't know what search terms might be useful here since I don't know if this has a technical name, but something like "refresh rate" or "fps" might help in the search.

If only. If only self scan was the only way this came up in my life I would be so much happier.

The people who put this up are not paid enough to risk challenging anybody on this. They're not crazy, they just need money to survive. Their bosses, on the other hand... Yeah, I don't know. It's amazing that it can make it through as many hands as it must have and nobody says "Are you sure?" Or maybe they did and they just kept being shut down.

I listened to a podcast episode about this, I believe it was 99% Invisible. The female dummies that have been used in the past are basically just scaled down males. That's not exactly ideal.

My favourite is the one with an extra filter in the middle.

I think with your bikes example, one of the factors is also that riding a bike is considered one of those fundamental skills in our society. You learn it early and internalize the rules of the machine. When bikes were knew, we absolutely had more tolerance for risk, so we didn't really care that people were getting hurt learning the ropes, and now that it's a staple we take for granted that people will be guided early on by more experienced riders. That's just not the case for something new. There isn't the widespread understanding of the device or any early training. It also helps that a bike is mechanical, so it's a bit easier to predict than something electronic, and of course the difference in safety standards now vs when bikes were new. So yeah, if bikes were just becoming a thing, we probably would feel different about their level of safety.

But I agree that anyone who wouldn't wear a helmet on one of these probably doesn't have much to protect up there anyway or is a literal child.

Well now I want a cloak.

You joke, but until about a year ago I thought there was something special about coffee because I'd only ever heard of or seen it come from some specialized contraption. Coffee makers, espresso machines, French press, percolators, Keurig machines, all obscuring the fact that coffee is just like tea; add hot water, you get beverage. This is the fundamental formula, everything else is just a way to do that. I felt so lied to. I only learned because I got curious about why there were so many methods and also seeing in the store what was basically a scoop shaped tea ball intended for coffee. Did you know that coffee bags exist in some places? Like tea bags, but coffee. I didn't, until I got curious, and now I really don't understand why all those machines exist.

Anyway, I blame never really getting into coffee (you can blame sorting by all for my presence), how many machines and methods there are, and a difference in how people seem to approach coffee vs tea for my ignorance. Generally tea seems to have more of a focus on the making and coffee on consumption, at least outside of dedicated communities.

Gotta be one of the ten thousand eventually, right?

Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.

And I am judging it right back. Give that head back to the pit bull you stole it from and find something more proportional.

Well it does now.

The store I work at had a really good house brand flavour called espresso almond fudge. When the packaging changed, the name did too, and it's never been on as good a sale again due to a lower price set also being introduced, so I don't know if it's the same anymore, but I loved it. It was similar to the Chapman's cappuccino, but with chocolate covered almonds mixed in. God I hope for a good sale again.

And the infinity symbol is likely related to the analemma, the shape the sun traces out over the course of a year.