lemon stealing whores …

Dare I ask for context?

My theory is that it’s because people who are into it must be really into it, but people who aren’t into it are very good at ignoring the fact that it’s titled like that or that there might be one or two throwaway lines implying it (especially when it’s “step”). So there’s an incentive for uploaders to title things like that and for creators to add a little nod in the video towards it (without adding too much incest roleplay) because it draws in a large audience and actively turns away very few.

For the non-Americans in the audience, what is White Claws?

I can’t imagine buying a porn game on Steam. And even if I did, incest holds no interest to me.

Even so, I absolutely fucking hate this crap. Payment processors are killing off content despite the producers and consumers of the content being completely fine with it. This should be a Net Neutrality issue. But I’m not seeing anywhere near the same outrage over it that there was over ISPs doing the exact same thing.

Maybe she’s just an urbanist? !fuckcars@lemmy.world

You’re misunderstanding the post. Yes, the reality of maths is that the integral is an operator. But the post talks about how “dx can be treated as an [operand]”. And this is true, in many (but not all) circumstances.

∫(dy/dx)dx = ∫dy = y

Or the chain rule:

(dz/dy)(dy/dx) = dz/dx

In both of these cases, dx or dy behave like operands, since we can “cancel” them through division. This isn’t rigorous maths, but it’s a frequently-useful shorthand.

The operand is the target of an operator

Correct. Thus, dx is an operand. It’s a thing by which you multiply the rest of the equation (or, in the case of dy/dx, by which you divide the dy).

“operative” instead of, uh, something else

I think they meant “operand”. As in, in the way dy/dx can sometimes be treated as a fraction and dx treated as a value.

Fake and gay.

No way the engineer corrects the mathematician for using j instead of i.

I don’t think it having “ideological connections” makes this metaphor weaker. In fact, I think it highlights exactly why using a comparison out of left field makes the metaphor stronger. The only reason non-fundamentalist-Christians and Jews in the west have for denying the genocide in Gaza is that it has become normalised to do so. If you take a step back and think about why a white moderate “Christmas-and-Easter Christian” (or even an atheist) American, Australian, or European might have a connection to what’s going on in the Middle East…like, really think about it, there is no rational explanation. Only because others have decided to politicise it and make it a talking point and a part of political identity, do westerners end up having disproportionally strong opinions about it. It’s self-reinforcing in that way, but it’s no more rational than the Welsh Rwandan genocide denier, at its core.

For every time a person has an intensely strong opinion about something they don’t know much about and which doesn’t actually affect them.

The first thing that came to my mind is the genocide in Gaza. Jews and fundamentalist Christians have a vested interest (sort of…), as do Israeli citizens (more obviously) in denying the genocide, but way more people than those small demographics do so. Those others are the grandpa.

But it occurred to me as I was writing that this could equally apply to things like gay marriage, or trans rights.

Happy cake day, frend!

(Psst. This is a metaphor.)

I took physics in high school, so I’m basically a qualified expert. I can confirm that quantum mechanics tell us that this is possible. Exceedingly unlikely, but possible.

Maybe, but I’d say if they don’t know Tank Man, seeing it in this context without further explanation is still unhelpful. Because they’re likely to think it’s a photo taken in America today.

Huh, fair enough.

Direct link to the actual toot source.

The second image is a bit on the nose IMO. The comparison was clear enough from the original. And yeah maybe some people need it pointed out to them, but I suspect those people are also the ones who will reject the idea regardless.

Yeah seriously. It’s pretty severely missed the point of this thread.

Ironic that it looks like someone came through and downvotes every answer in this thread other than this one, considering. It’d be pretty great if the mods banned whoever that was.

I usually stare at their mouth if I’m talking to someone. How else do you concentrate on what they’re saying? Their eyes aren’t the part that talks.

I’ve definitely seen claims that the idea of “a far stole my baby and replaced it with a changeling” could have been caused by ASD.