952
submitted 15 hours ago by sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 9 points 1 hour ago
[-] tempest@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 hour ago

And they had arms

[-] ansiz@lemmy.world 1 points 21 minutes ago

I've heard a saying, two things you should never do on the Internet are argue or explain. It takes up a lot of mental energy and time to do it for no reward.

[-] EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 45 minutes ago

We lost all the ice in the polar regions back in 2013. And the hole in the ozone layer killed everyone back in the 1990s

[-] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 hour ago

F'real I think my kids have had maybe one snow day so far, and my oldest is in second grade. We live in southeast Mass.

I thought about buying a new snowblower, but the fact is that I think we had maybe one storm in the past 5 or 6 years where I actually would've used my old one. The little dustings we had were easily cared for by a shovel.

I also have a part of my driveway that has a lot of tree overhang and never really gets much snow on it. It also happens that the winter morning sun has a direct path to this patch of asphalt, so if we get only an inch or two, it'll all melt away as soon as the sun comes up. Assuming it's not too overcast.

[-] Nyanix@lemmy.ca 32 points 4 hours ago

ngl, I don't comment nearly as often anymore out of concern for anything I say to be misconstrued, argued, or wanting verification like this meme. Ya'll, I've got a job and a life, I can't/don't want to sit here and fight people. The worst gets assumed of anything and it gets difficult to have productive, much less positive discourse online.

[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 32 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

This is also due to a distinct drop in reader comprehension. One of the largest parts of reading comprehension is being able to infer the intended audience for a particular piece of work. You should be able to read a news article, see a commercial, read a comment, etc and infer who it is aimed at. And the answer is usually not “me”.

People have become accustomed to having an algorithm that is laser focused to their specific preferences. So when they see something that’s not aimed at them it is jarring, and they tend to get upset. Instead of going “oh this clearly isn’t aimed at me, but I can infer who the intended audience is. I’ll move on.” Now they tend to jump on the creator with whataboutisms and imagined offense.

Maybe you make a post about the proper way to throw a football. You’ll inevitably get a few “bUT wHaT abOUt WhEElcHaiR uSerS, I hAvE a baD ShoUlDer aNd cAn’T thROW SO wHaT abOUt me, I haTE FoOtbAll wHY aRe yOU SHowiNG tHIs to Me, etc” types of comments. It’s because those users have lost the ability to infer an intended audience. They automatically assume everything they see is aimed at them, and get offended when it isn’t.

I have even noticed this started to affect the way media is written. Creators tend to make it a point to outright state their intended audience, just to avoid the negative comments.

[-] Aqarius@lemmy.world 1 points 6 minutes ago

This is a very interesting idea. It would certainly explain why people seem to constantly "infill" everything everone says with whatever gets them the most angry - the algo feeds them ragebait, so that's what they see.

[-] ilhamagh@lemmy.world 8 points 2 hours ago

Hmm good point. Never realized there could be connection with hyper curated algorithm and main character syndrome.

Now I kinda understand why "just look away" makes no sense to these kinda people.

[-] Maeve@midwest.social 1 points 1 hour ago

"If it doesn't apply, let it fly." "Hit dogs holler."

[-] Darkenfolk@dormi.zone 7 points 2 hours ago

What, feeling too good for an unproductive Internet fight with strangers who probably would agree with you if they could read?

[-] Shark_Ra_Thanos@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 hours ago

Don't worry. It won't happen like this. There will be no one left.

[-] nexguy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

SOURc......

[-] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 2 points 2 hours ago

I would like to see the source for this meme.

[-] Toribor@corndog.social 18 points 4 hours ago

I asked my employer provided AI assistant if this is true and it assured me that natural snowfall was disinformation invented by leftists in order to destroy our capitalist utopia.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 25 points 5 hours ago

I've already had people demand "source?" for the most mundane facts. Why yes steroids do enhance physical ability.

[-] TriflingToad@lemmy.world 12 points 5 hours ago
[-] residentmarchant@lemmy.world 17 points 5 hours ago

Read the comment above yours, that's where I learned about it

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago

this guy showed up with receipts

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CazzoneArrapante@lemm.ee 4 points 3 hours ago

Just give me back the fucking 80s and 90s.

[-] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 40 points 6 hours ago

There are clips out there of FOX news saying "if global warning is real, then why is there a blizzard?!"

[-] turtletracks@lemmy.zip 21 points 5 hours ago

Republicans have a hard time understanding nonliterals, it's honestly weird and one of the most common denominators between them I've noticed

[-] leftytighty@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 hours ago

Weird to think that human civilization will collapse out of a misplaced sense of fairness where we think it's better for uninformed people to have a choice even if that choice dooms us all. Liberalism is going to collapse in the silliest way

[-] xthexder@l.sw0.com 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

The goal should be to have less uninformed people overall by educating the population. But unfortunately the people in charge keep voting against funding education (and basically anything beneficial to society).

[-] leftytighty@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 hour ago

Capitalism wants an uneducated voter base, we can import educated people for jobs

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago

They seem to be fine with euphemisms and dog whistles.

[-] turtletracks@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 hours ago

Maybe willfully ignorant is a better way to put it

[-] root_beer@midwest.social 5 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Hidden panel: guy on left saying “google it yourself, don’t expect me to have to teach you anything”

Why should anyone ever have to substantiate their claims???

[-] NutWrench@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago

I would just assume that anyone who needed a cite for really obvious stuff is just trolling.

[-] root_beer@midwest.social 4 points 3 hours ago

Yeah, I suppose the obvious stuff, sure

Guess I’m just rankled by seeing so many people making baseless claims and then telling everyone to figure it out themselves when they get called out on it, and it’s not the same as this.

[-] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 27 points 7 hours ago

Let's not vilify people asking for citations. With AI it's more important than ever to verify what you're reading.

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 hours ago

Sealioning is not about citations. It's bad-faith harassment.

Bad faith only works because it resembles good faith. Calling it out is not somehow a condemnation of good faith.

[-] Flyberius@hexbear.net 6 points 4 hours ago

Source please

[-] abbenm@lemmy.ml 66 points 6 hours ago

I'm absolutely okay with vilifying people asking for sources on the historical existence of snow.

[-] TonoManza@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 3 hours ago

This is Puerto Rican erasure.

[-] underisk@hexbear.net 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

The historical existence of snow depends on where you’re talking about. Climate is changing but not every manifestation of that will cause less snow. It’s possible some places start getting more as rising temperatures create more moisture in the air in places that are historically cold and dry. For example, parts of the mountains here in Nevada had unusually high snowfall, like Lee’s Canyon While looking at (what appears to be) the historical data for the US overall doesn’t seem to show a significant deviation at a cursory glance.

Saying these things are obviously true while not bothering to check if they’re factually accurate is misrepresenting the problem and leaves openings for climate denialists to make themselves more credible. “You said snowfall was going down but it just saw record snowfall in the news!” Which is a bad argument but a convincing one to people who aren’t inclined to deal with a global apocalyptic problem.

[-] Entropywins@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago

Pretty bold comment for someone with no sources.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Fleur_@lemm.ee 82 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

The evil version of this is when people cite a click bait article, you go to the article and read the attached study and the study is not backing up their claims in any meaningful way. Like come on bro you clearly haven't read this study don't cite it and claim I need to educate myself.

[-] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

Spoken like someone who’s never experienced the ancient healing frequencies :p

[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 32 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Average YouTube influencer for me.

It's gotten even worse in the past year. Most of them sound like they're parroting AI summaries of blog posts and sprinkling stupid ass cutaway gags to memes. Like rather than actually consuming the entire body of context around a subject and having an informed take, they're just giving shallow thoughts and trying to monetize.

Any YouTuber whose whole angle is to spicy commentary on current events in tech/programming is definitely part of the trash heap.

Problem here is you're watching "influencers."

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2024
952 points (96.8% liked)

Memes

45324 readers
2227 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS