This is a great photograph.

He looks kinda like a mix of Putin and Zuckerberg.

Looking at the US candidates from Germany, this is always how Bernie appeared to me.

I remember this meme!! In 2020 I came across a stackexchange question referencing this meme, which I found kinda interesting: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/49999/are-cadavers-normally-embalmed-with-butt-plugs-before-burial

I wish my memory was as good for things that aren't memes.

Dear spujb's stalker, if you read this, pm me the code for a paysafecard and I'll downvote their !lemmyshitpost comments for you as well.

This cat

I'm kind of dissatisfied with the answers here. As soon as you talk about actually drawing a line in the real world, the distinction between rational and irrational numbers stops making sense. In other words, the distinction between rational and irrational numbers is a concept that describes numbers to an accuracy that is impossible to achieve in real life. So you cannot draw a line with a clearly irrational length, but neither can you draw a line with a clearly rational length. You can only define theoretical mathematical constructs which can then be classified as rational or irrational, if applicable.

More mathematically phrased: in real life, your line to which you assign the length L will always have an inaccuracy of size x>0. But for any real L, the interval (L-x;L+x) contains both an infinite number of rational and an infinite number of irrational numbers. Note that this is independent of how small the value of x is. This is why I said that the accuracy, at which the concept of rational and irrational numbers make sense, is impossible to achieve in real life.

So I think your confusion stems from mixing the lengths we assign to objects in the real world with the lengths we can accurately compute for mathematical objects that we have created in our minds using axioms and definitions.

I love playing this with my cat. Works especially well when you audibly drag your feet and when you move around corners or behind objects a lot. I learned this by watching my cat play with her son. However she only lets me play the prey role and gets aggressive when I do the same to her. Her son also used to let me hunt him a bit, but he disappeared one day :/

I see a lot of hate against the concept of doing one's own research on the internet and it really bothers me. The problem is not doing one's own research. The scientists that wrote this paper also did their own research. All scientists (should) do their own research. That's inherent to science and that's part of what got humanity this far. The problem is that some people lack the capabilities to properly assess information sources and draw correct conclusions from them. So these people end up with incorrect beliefs. Of course they could just "trust the experts" instead, but how are they supposed to know which experts to trust if they're not good at assessing sources of information? Finding those experts is in itself a task that requires you to do your own research.

TL;DR: I think this hate on "doing your own research" is unjustified. People believing nonsense is a problem that is inescapable and inherent to humanity.

When people want to enter a bus, especially a crowded one, it makes a lot more sense to wait for the people who want to get out of the bus to leave first.

This one is so baffling to me, it's really changed my view of how stupid some people really are. What do they even expect, that the other passengers magically disappear? It's really not an abstract problem if the other passengers are trying to leave right in front of you. Trying to enter a bus is also not a rare situation, so you'd expect people to understand this at least after the first few times. Unbelievable.

Soijaks have gone too far

Definitely no. In addition to the downsides you mentioned, I feel like the redditor's desire for karma is what causes these hiveminds/echo chambers and cliché comments that are so typical of many subreddits.

Edit: Thank you so much for the gold kind stranger!