Yes, the meme is referring to something else.
For some reason, cishet american men on dating apps love to put a picture of themselves holding up a fish they caught while fishing as one of their dating profile pics.
Nobody really knows why that’s supposed to attract a potential dating partner, but it’s really common.
we were created in gods image 🙏god loves a good railing like the rest of us
why study language at all
To understand it, and how and why it evolves over time, just like any other study. There’s no such thing as prescriptivist physics, or math, or biology, or etc etc. We don’t get to tell the world how it works, and pretty much no science is focused on that assumption other than historical linguistics.
we could all just speak however we want as long as we understood
We do speak however we want, and we do understand, because we pick up new trends in language on an unconscious level and this is the way languages have always worked and evolved.
then we end up with an uncountable number of dialects and creoles
We’ve already ended up there, and that’s nothing new. Sure, new languages/dialects/creoles creep into the world, but that’s how all languages evolve — instead, the lines between “what’s a language”, “what’s a dialect”, and “what’s a creole” get grayed and more blurry and fuzzy.
The thing is, humans developed language a very very long time ago, and those languages evolve and split off due to large-scale trends in the lives of humans speaking those languages, for a multitude of reasons that interact and make the process essentially random.
Here’s one way to look at it: it’s the opposite of the “jurassic park” problem, instead of “your scientists were preoccupied with whether or not they could, they never stopped to ask whether they should”, linguists spent so much time arguing over prescriptivist/descriptivist arguments, and never asked whether prescriptivism actually can control the evolution of a language.
Anybody, even some random teen in some random neighborhood in any english speaking country, can come up with a new word, and it can catch on and eventually become a new accepted and widely-used word. That’s because it’s a “you can use this if you want” situation, whereas the prescriptivist version is “if you use ___ you are wrong, if you want to be right use ___ only”.
It should be obvious why telling someone they can do something is an easier argument than that they can’t, and this is why prescriptivism has failed. especially because, again, nobody saw “should of” in this post and thought “oh god i don’t know what this is supposed to mean”; instead people either understood and said nothing, or they understood but jumped in to tell people they’re wrong for making them understand in a way that contradicts what their own english teachers in school said they SHOULD be able to understand.
Most modern linguists consider “should have” to be a completely valid variation of should’ve / should have.
Yes, it does contradict what your english teachers in school taught you, and according to that world view “if we don’t have those rules then we wouldn’t be able to understand each other”. But the hundreds to thousands of languages where those rules don’t even exist and people understand missing/“incorrect” meaning from context, as well as the fact that you can proudly stand on your “i know what’s right” soapbox and say that “should of” is wrong, only serve to prove that these rules aren’t actually rules or part of the english language and are more like the linguistic equivalent of fashion.
Again, you understood exactly the meaning OP meant, enough that you could confidently barge in and tell them they’re “wrong”, and tell them what they should have used instead to fit your fashion rules.
Basically, absolutely nobody saw this meme, saw “should have” instead of “should have”, and thought “hmm, i don’t know what’s supposed to be being said in this case.” You dislike “should have” because you were told you were supposed to, and that if you didn’t stick to these rules nobody would respect you or understand what you’re saying. Now, you do the same thing and lose respect for people who didn’t (while also understanding what they are saying exactly). That has nothing to do with the language, and is, again, more akin to “you wore white after labor day” or “you wore socks with sandals” or whatever other fashion faux pas you committed — none of which are related to actual linguistics or the natural way through which languages evolve (or whether or not your outfit looks good on you on any given day)
yes, tired brain hiccup :)
there are 8 logic gates in a byte
uh. no? a logic gate isn’t a bit. you can store a single bit with a pair of not gates to make a flip flop, but the core logic here is flawed
In the USA most people would say “august 9th”, not “the 9th of august”, which is one of the reasons mm/dd/yyyy is the standard format here
who are the other five guys tho bc i’m lonely
i mean technically we have the and thə
Software bugs are not aware of, nor do they care about, all of your plans, deadlines, budgets, assigned teams, predictable results, communication between departments, or anything else. By definition, software bugs are unpredicted results. That’s what a bug is: a problem you weren’t prepared for.
Nobody’s goal is a buggy mess, nobody intends to miss a deadline. What happens is some people spend as much time on something until they’re told not to, and this becomes a business decision that comes down to estimated cost of developer time, estimated cost of not implementing it, and sometimes the bug that you care about the most is not prioritized, because of the “cost to fix” vs “cost to not fix” to project managers and executives.
You’re not special. The bugs you want fixed aren’t special. The developer who wants to fix this bug out of personal pride isn’t special, nor is their work. The only thing that is special is developer time vs profit from that developer’s time, and that decision is not made by anyone with any level of passion for the project. Just “cost of doing this” and “cost of not doing this” vs profit when doing/not-doing, which is a decision based on money only.
The whole meme of this post is a clipping issue; in real life, clipping is physically impossible, it would require two things to exist in the same physical space, and the physics that enforce that in the real world are free; we don’t have to check to make sure the physical world is mathematically possible. In game development, there is a mathematical/time cost to every interaction that real life solves with physics. There’s no way to tell a computer “don’t do anything that isn’t physically possible”, because in-game objects are not physical objects and are not affected by physical reality at all, because they are abstract mathematical concepts that are not grounded in physics, just pure math.
This is not as an easy of a task as you make it out to be, and becomes more difficult every year as the cost of creating an AAA game increases.
Software is complex, and the more complex it gets, the more bugs there are. There’s no such thing as bug-free software, and for every bug/feature you think “this should have been obvious to anyone making a game like this”, there are hundreds of other bugs/features that you didn’t think of but someone else thinks “should have been obvious way before release”.
(disclaimer: i am not involved in game development professionally, although i have been a software engineer professionally for decades. however these concepts apply to software development both inside and outside of the gaming industry. i also find it disgusting when gamers put on their “armchair software developer” hats and talk about how easy it should be to write a game without “whatever issue i’m currently dealing with”)
My whole post was sarcasm, I hate that people complain about that line exactly because why the fuck would an x-wing pilot know about the mechanisms behind palpatine’s resurrection?
I know, right? Such a fucking stupid line, it’s like nobody ever saw a star war.
Well i did see all every star war, and i’ll tell you what i learned. If a Sith Lord had machinations to be resurrected in the case of his eventual death, the VERY FIRST thing he would do upon the successful completion of that plan is announce that fact to the entire galaxy, and explain to the entire galaxy, especially every random X-Wing pilot fighting for the rebellion, that he is now officially back and here is how he was able to do so.
The Sith do not hide in the shadows. They do not operate in secret. They do not subtly manipulate. They do not lie or deceive. They operate in public, explaining every step of their history and future plan to the entire galaxy. If palpatine were to be resurrected, even fucking jawas and droids could tell you the exact methodology by which he did so.
Anyone who has seen ANY star war would know this. It just wouldn’t make sense in context of the rest of the series, which is well-known for being hard scifi that stays as accurate to the physical universe as possible. To break those rules you’d have to invent some sort of magic or some mystical woowoo made up forces to explain how palpating returned, and god if someone did that i’d just give up on all of the star wars, not just any individual star war.
Well, yes, but as you are working on an equation for yourself to work through a problem, it really doesn’t matter. you can intentionally break PEMDAS for your own notation.
When communicating the equation to others, though, doing your best to make it comprehensible to people of all skill levels is absolutely not wasted work. Reformatting equations so the largest number of people comprehend what that means is absolutely valuable.
Edit: hell, as long as you’re consistent with your personal notation, you could get anarchistic about it and use SADMEP notation.
It’s also not that hard to just write it in a far less confusing way in many cases.
In this simple case, 4 x 2 + 2 or 2 x 4 + 2 would have been superior choices because both people reading left to right and people following pemdas correctly would get it right, and only people mis-remembering pemdas would be confused.
To be fair, it’s completely arbitrary, and all of math would be easier to understand, although slightly more verbose, if the only rule of order of operations is “always use parentheses to denote order, there are no implied parentheses”.
lazy mfs from centuries ago who were mortified by the thought of having to write ( and ) too much (lord what i wouldn’t give to hop in a time machine and show them lisp) should not be dictating our mathematical notation in this century. Explicit grouping is always more obvious to the reader.
At first i assumed it was all sex toys.
i’ve been planning on getting a tattoo similar to this
I think you’re misunderstanding the point of the whole meme, and by extension, what i have been saying. It may be more common for country dwellers, but it’s also incredibly common for city dwellers.
There is also never a woman in any of these pics. It’s usually a dude with a bunch of other dudes. I understand that it might be your hobby, and there’s nothing wrong with that being your hobby.
But if it’s a hobby you only share with other dudes and not your partners, and it’s the only hobby on your dating profile, and it’s the most common “only hobby i have pictures of myself doing” for men on dating sites, then at least one of the following isnt probably true:
again, i’m speaking from experience on dating apps, and from anecdotes from other women i know. It is incredibly common (i would guess, as a city girl, who only matches with other people in my city, and not surrounding rural areas, at least 20-40%) for a picture of you fishing with your guy friends to be the only picture of you doing anything you enjoy.
Even if that’s your primary hobby, there’s dozens of other dudes in my inbox for whom that is their only hobby that they care enough to take pictures of.
Otherwise you’re just showing me 3-4 face (and/or, for some reason, shirtless) pics and a pic of you fishing with your bros. It’s not appealing, and it’s far from unique. You’ve also not shown me anything we can do together, and your profile mentions nothing else either.
And no, i’m not looking for a man to take me to four star restaurants or whatever else you think i’m after. I make good enough money to cover my needs and hobbies and treat both myself and my partner with nice stuff and experiences. I want someone who is going to spend time with me, with whom i share hobbies, interests, and ideals.