Literally the entire point of the comment that you’re responding to is that it isn’t true for the metre, and it isn’t true for any SI units.

Your entire claim of tautology rests on the assertion that the speed of light is defined by something external to light itself. That’s false. It remains false irrespective of which SI measurements you swap in.

Just because the speed of light can be expressed in terms of SI units, doesn’t mean its definition depends on them. Which is the point that wolframhydroxide was making.

This directly disproves your original assertion of tautology.

People complain about the proportional sizing of Mercator but the sense of direction it gives us is completely broken.

With respect, this is silly. People complain about the proportional sizing of the Mercator projection because disproportionate sizing is literally the only problem with the Mercator projection.

The sense of direction being off has got literally nothing to do with Mercator. That’s an inherent drawback of trying to project a three dimensional globe onto a 2D image. Literally every single projection has this exact problem, in one form or another. It is considered ot be an acceptable trade-off for not having to work with globes all the time.

Stop looking for yet more baseless reasons to bash the Mercator projection, which is a perfectly reasonable and acceptable projection to use within its intended usecase (which this specific example literally is).

Nissin, but you gotta get the Demae Ramen, not that Top Ramen shit.

No, it’s not you, the joke just doesn’t work.

So in other words, the documentary was so successful in decrying the rampant hyperconsumption that was accepted in its time, that such rampant is no longer considered acceptable or normal. And on that basis, you consider it to be facile, obvious… “problematic”?

No shit its conclusions were already obvious to educated people. They were never the target demographic. Literally nobody references Supersize Me as a “study”. It isn’t, and it hasn’t ever claimed to be. It’s a shock story to grab the attention of the least well-informed segment of the population. That you’re trying to call it out for not succeeding at being something it never claimed to be, and even more so for succeeding at the thing it did try to be, is not a problem with the documentary.

Whenver you come up with similarly hot takes, the comments always end up being filled with a you offering litany of obtuse bad reasoning.

I think that’s probably a fairly uncontroversial opinion. In the city-builder genre, Lethis: Path of Progress aimed to be the definitive city-building game of its time, hoping to match the peaks of Caesar and Pharaoh in the city-builder heyday. Instead, Lethis ended up being a huge flop, precisely because it slavishly copied the mechanics of Caesar without understanding that games as a whole have evolved since then.

Lethis lacked certain quality of life features that now feel obvious and baseline. What’s sad is that these features had already evolved towards the tail end of the city-builder heyday, in games such as Children of the Nile, and now feel glaringly obvious by their omission. Other city-builders that haven’t been so tied to the classics have seen more success (although there’s been no true breakout hits, sadly, no great renaissance in the genre).

The inside of the cone is coated in chocolate to prevent it from getting soggy from all the melted icecream. It tends to pool at the bottom because that’s how gravity works.

There is no “random” plug of chocolate. It’s an inherent function of the product. No matter what the flavour of icecream is, the cone itself is inherently a chocolate product.

So yes, you are, in fact, knowingly purchasing chocolate products, as evidenced by the fact that you’re currently complaining about all the chocolate in these cones that you keep purchasing. If you hate chocolate that much, then maybe just don’t buy it?

This is entirely a problem of your own making. And people are correct in pointing out that your responses have been nothing but toxic.

I don’t follow any blogs particularly consistently/regularly, but the one that I find myself coming back to at intervals is Raymond Chen’s The Old New Thing. It’s got a pretty heavy programming focus, but also occasionally covers interesting little trivia from Windows history. I’m not a professional coder, and I no longer even do any coding as a hobby, so take it from me when I say that there’s content of interest to programmers and non-programmers alike.

References and phrases don’t make a culture. The words may change, but the culture here is absolutely the same as Reddit. Which is why it’s so damned cringe when you see someone on Lemmy offer a smug, self-satisfied criticism of some supposed inferiority in the Reddit userbase. That kind of smugness is peak Reddit-culture.

No. Everywhere uses the same terms, you just didn’t understand the question.

The result of addition is the sum. The sum is calculated by summation of inputs.

The result of multiplication is the product. The product is calculated by __________ of inputs.

OP’s question is: why can’t the blank be “production”, by analogy with “summation”?

“Summation” already means something else, and funnily enough words can have different meanings in different contexts without causing any confusion.

OP literally emphasised the distinction between process and result in their post, specifically so that this exact confusion would not occur, and yet still everyone is talking about the word for the result instead of the process.

Uh huh, because that’s what they were advocating for. Sure. I’m gonna do you the favour of assuming good faith, so I’m not sure if you just didn’t read the operative word “supposedly” in their comment, but if not: don’t be so naïve.

There are widely documented occasions on which smaller instances have been blacklisted based on entirely spurious and false accusations of “fascism”. All it takes is for one large enough instance to defederate, and others will follow based on their word alone. This results in the affected instance becoming non-viable, due to absence of any visibility amongst the wider fediverse. In one well-known case, an instance was branded as “fascist” and forced to shut down because the admin refused to take censorious actions that would have been illegal in their country.

That is the outcome you are advocating for when you suggest that such instances should be “iced out”. And that outcome is the “toxic community” that we should be most wary of, because it is insidious and cloaks itself in a guise of supposed good intentions.

And before you suggest that these are isolated incidents that don’t reflect the behaviours of communities at large: don’t forget that it was mere days ago that feddit.uk, a rather large instance, was defederated by another large instance based on entirely baseless and spurious claims of transphobia, prompting the instance admin to issue a “guidance” post that basically just reiterated the existing rules… and suddenly this was seen as ok, and not transphobic at all. Imagine if the admin had instead not issued this statement, and pointed out that the existing rules were already sufficient? The instance’s anti-transphobia stance has not changed, but I don’t doubt that other instances would have portrayed such a response as doubling down on transphobia and defederated. So even large instances are not immune!

Defederation should be a last resort for rogue instances that support actual problematic behaviours like fascism. It should never be considered an action of first resort based on any accusation of supposed fascism or communism. Which was OP’s point. Yet it never ceases to shock and amaze me at how openly and readily people are willing to suggest such a thing.

Literally nobody is suggesting that actual fascist instances should not be defederated. Nobody needs to debate what should be done about those, because the answer is obvious, and already widely implemented (i.e. defederate). So why even bring it up, as if it’s a valid rebuttal to OP’s point? It’s not, and it’s disappointing how so many discussions on this subject devolve to comments with an absolutist stance that has a feelgood vibe, without actually analysing it for cogency to the actual discussion at hand.

I never cease to be baffled by the seemingly boundless glee with which Americans will repeat this myth that has no basis outside of Internet cope. Literally nobody born in the last 100 years would read “trump” to mean “fart”. The only meaning of “trump” to British people is the winning suit in a game of cards, or the concept of winning in general. There’s literally a collectible card game in Britain called “Top Trumps”, and let me tell you, it ain’t about huffing farts. Unlike your absurd comment.

And even if people did understand “trump” to mean “fart”, it’s still an astonishing feat of mental gymnastics to claim that “it makes no sense that you would elect someone called that”, because funnily enough, a person’s name is totally unrelated to their ability to do the job, and lots of people have funny-sounding names that go completely unremarked upon, because people understand that a name is just a name.

I absolutely hate the guy, and yet when I see people purporting to make fun of his name based on something that isn’t even true, rather than, y’know, attacking his actual policies and actions, it makes me despair at the pathetic state of American politics. Seriously, your country is going to the dogs, and the best thing you could think of to combat that is to baselessly make fun of a guy’s name?

But a tomato isn’t even an actual fruit…

“Actual” refers to the ordinary “plain English” meaning. Under the “plain English” definition, i.e. non-technical, non-domain-specific, a tomato is a vegetable.

It’s a botanical fruit, but an actual vegetable.