this post was submitted on 18 May 2025

499 points (86.5% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

31628 readers

4267 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!

Rules:

1. Be Respectful

Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...

2. No Illegal Content

Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...

3. No Spam

Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...

4. No Porn/Explicit

Content

-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...

5. No Enciting Harassment,

Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts

-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...

6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.

Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)

Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

499

Don't ask for more pixels (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 3 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

73 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Microcosmic example. Take 3 people - a newborn (A), a professor of biology (B) and a professor in philosophy (C).

You're easily able to argue that both professors are more intelligent than the newborn (A<B and A<C). However, you're unable to establish (in any meaningful way) whether B<C, or C<B; even B=C is out. This is because both professors have knowledge the other does not, so trying to meaningfully equate or order them in relation to one another is an act of futility.

This is a fun example of a partial order that most of us see every day (in a less extreme form).

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That's also part of the reason why IQ scores are deeply flawed. Using a single number to measure intelligence implies there is an absolute order.

Fun fact: Richard Feynman, one of the greatest physicist of the 20th century and legendary physics educator (author of the Feynman Lectures), was invited to join Mensa after he won the Nobel Prize in physics. He declined however, because he didn't meet the IQ score of 130 normally required by Mensa.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Gardner’s “multiple intelligences” model is a nicer way to think about intelligence, but it’s not really quantifiable in the same way. (How would you measure how “ecologically” intelligent someone is?)

It’s very appealing to think that we have some sort of “int” stat like a Dungeons and Dragons character, but I don’t think it’s really that valuable. If the IQ/the “g factor” measures anything, it’s probably something about being able to quickly process visual information. I have a relatively high IQ and think that’s the trait I have that is being measured (from the testing they did in the teen torture facility I spent my adolescence in - my high IQ meant that I was a dangerous, manipulative liar of course.)

If you have two and a half hours to spare, I think this Shaun video is a masterwork of science communication.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's similar with the ASVAB (multisection test for determing qualification for military service). I scored the highest score available, a 99, because it seemed in each section they moved on once they established competence.

The few people who saw my score (I don't go around telling people) have asked if I was super smart or something (the recruiter called me "professor" and asked if I had a Masters), and I said no, I am just competent at anything I could do in the military. I'm honestly not excellent at any particular thing, and in any given task I'm unlikely to be the best one there for it. But I'm capable of doing any task adequately. As my old trombone instructor used to say, I'm a "jack of all trades, master of none."

But the test doesn't care if you're amazing at anything. It just wants to see if you're capable of doing anything.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

looky here we got us a man who earned a 99 in cleaning out the shithouse. Grab a shovel, "Professor".

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

I mean, yeah, I can very competently clean out a shithouse as well as I can competently fix a helicopter. I probably won't be exceptional at either one (though I absolutely kill it on written tests, I guess).

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

My money's on the biology professor.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I say we let them fight to the death to see which one is smarter. I'm putting extra money on the Philosophy Professor going on a rant about how physical combat has nothing to do with intelligence - and getting struck down in the midst of his soliloquy.

Biology Professor: "Survival of the fittest!"

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

Put another way: like so may things, knowledge is multidimensional. If you just compared them on knowledge of chess openings, or how many digits of π they could recall, you could rank them more confidently on that axis.

But general intelligence is such a slippery fish compared to isolated trivia.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

I didn't know there was a term for this! Thank you! I try to convey this concept all the time, especially for intelligence and skills, so having a word for it is immensely helpful.

[–] [email protected] 177 points 3 days ago (7 children)

Don't ask for more pixels

Why? Because you're unable to use basic reverse image search or because you're too lazy and unwilling?

[–] [email protected] 66 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Because they know by doing that they can both get engagement and someone else to find the best quality version for them.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This has the same energy as the observation that the most reliable way to get an answer on the internet is to post the wrong answer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Poe's law I believe

[–] [email protected] 27 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why would getting engagement matter on lemmyshitpost?

[–] [email protected] 23 points 3 days ago

People are trained to serve the algo and do it even in cases where it does nothing.

It's also why not feeding trolls is a lost art.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 days ago

Maybe it's an artistic statement

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] [email protected] 94 points 3 days ago (3 children)

So at some point, the original screenshot was posted somewhere that doesn't allow the words "sexuality" and "spectrum" but "gayest" is a-okay. Interesting.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

Internet censorship has somehow become wider and less thoughtful than TV and movie censorship ever was. Including Hayes Code shit.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 3 days ago (6 children)

[–] [email protected] 35 points 3 days ago

Y! Z?

... Oh wait, right, that's a platform, I keep forgetting.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Why doesn't a spectrum imply total ordering? Seems like an ordinary one-dimensional line (of course in reality, sexuality is not just a spectrum either, it's some high-dimensional space, but I digress…).

Or do I just not know the word spectrum properly?

[–] [email protected] 30 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The spectrum in question:

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

****trum

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The world would be a better place if everyone intuitively understood the difference between a spectrum and a scale.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Wait how do they differ? Aren't radio waves the gayest waves in the electromagnetic spectrum?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

See? Thats exactly the problem.

OF COURSE radio waves are the gayest waves in the electromagnetic spectrum. BECAUSE they are the ONLY gay waves in the electromagnetic spectrum.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

it’s possible for it to be a total ordering and yet for there to be no gayest person. for example, the open interval (0, 1) is totally ordered and yet has no minimum or maximum. (the maximum would be 1, but it’s not included in the interval by definition.)

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The set of humans currently alive is finite though

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

you got me there

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 24 points 3 days ago (7 children)

Still trying to wrap my head around how a partial ordering plays out here. I think it's fair to say that for any such nonempty spectrum, there exists at least one person about whom it can be said: "nobody is gayer than they are." Right? (even if 1 or more people are equally gay...)

[–] [email protected] 41 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Its the difference between maximum gayness and maximal gayness. Maximum gayness is being more gay, or at least as gay, as everybody else; while maximal gayness is not being less gay than anybody else (just as you put it). Two people with maximal gayness can have incomparable gaynessess, and thats the key thing about partial orderings, this possibility of incomparability. there could be many maximally gay people. they wouldnt be equally gay, but incomparably gay.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] [email protected] 23 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Cum all over my tits, make me your alfredo dipped fucknugget

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If anyone wanted explicitly sexual words, they have them now. You’re welcome.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Remind me of the one where they catch a white guy with cheese

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 days ago (3 children)

What about multiple people at the gayest point?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

Battle royal

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

There can be only one!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

*gayest point known to men yet. You never know man.

load more comments