That’s why i rotate my underwear and socks
this post was submitted on 19 May 2025
268 points (98.6% liked)
memes
14820 readers
4242 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That's why you gotta FIFO
Turn that stack into a queue.
Weighted average is the way to go
I always let the oven timer beep a few times, even if I’m standing right there, so it doesn’t feel frustrated that it’s not serving its purpose.
Nah, unnecessary noise makers can get fucked. I have a tower fan that has a mute button to prevent beeping, I love it so much i bought a second one.
Why would you buy a fan that beeps?
One of the best things about having knowledge in component level electronics is being able to open up consumer electronics and disable unnecessary lights and speakers. Personal table top fans are a big offender here. Lots of folks use them at night, and there's no reason they need to have 10 bright blue LEDs lit all the time the fan has power.
I’m lazy and cover bright LEDs with thick black electrical tape. Even then it sometimes takes more than one piece of tape.
The fan i mentioned also shuts off the LEDs shortly after you stop pressing buttons (Breo is the brand i think?) 😁
I could definitely remove a speaker if i wanted to but i have fat fingers and its hard to put things back together again sometimes.
What do you do with the second mute button?
I keep it at my desk and spam push it while making eye contact with anyone who talks at me while i work.
I’d say a beep for an oven is not unnecessary. Quite the opposite. The last thing you’d want to do is leave your food in the oven too long. Best case scenario it gets overcooked. Worst case: your house/apartment burns down. Yes, it’s annoying, but in this case, it’s worth it.
The pre-heat beep is nice: other than that, we live in a time where everyone has a more advanced, easier to use, and highly customizable timer in their pocket (cell phones). I would absolutely consider oven timers unnecessary.
As a single father who ~~sometimes~~ can’t for the life of me properly plan a meal, I find sometimes I have to run to the store in the middle of cooking for my kids. There’s also the fact that no matter where I am in my house, everybody can hear the oven timer. Basically, it’s not just on me to turn the oven off when time is up.
As for the preheat beep; I typically ignore preheating and just shove whatever in the oven and let it cook while it heats up.
And now that we’re talking about it, I actually don’t use my oven timer. I use my microwave timer. However, they are pretty much one and the same.
That's fair! I spent a lot of my childhood hearing a loud oven beep that somehow didn't reach the back of the house (where the person who set it was), so oven timers never really made sense compared to something more portable and customizable.
I agree for the most part. I just have a special relationship with the oven timer.
That's why I slide clean plates under the pile
Also applies to food, dishes (getting dusty), etc.
Not trying to be rude or stupid, but is projecting emotions onto inanimate objects and being emotionally affected by imaginarily anthropomorphised circumstances a neurotypical thing? I remember in high school chemistry class when my classmates were awing and giddy over how “cute” a ~1” tall and 1/2” diameter beaker was and I just couldn’t understand.
- The way you phrased your question is neither rude, nor stupid. It’s a valid question.
- Yes, a lot of people like to humanize objects. It makes them fun and/or relatable. It’s not much different than seeing shapes in clouds.
Humans will pack bond with anything
I feel like it's the other way around
Have you ever had any kind of emotional reaction, even a mild, one to this lamp?
I understand the purpose of anthropomorphizing for the sake of narrative storytelling. But I don’t relate to people unwillingly imagining an inanimate object to be sentient and emotive to such an intense degree that the imaginer is affected by it. I’ve pondered with purpose over writing metaphors or fantasy worldbuilding, but it has been with intent rather than passively.
(And yes, my most recent emotional reaction to that lamp was disappointment with a couple of areas of the design of its new Lego set)
But I don’t relate to people unwillingly imagining an inanimate object to be sentient and emotive to such an intense degree that the imaginer is affected by it. I’ve pondered with purpose over writing metaphors or fantasy worldbuilding, but it has been with intent rather than passively.
I don't quite understand the distinction you're making between the former and latter. The only difference I'm seeing is it is something you actively have to do while others can do it passively. If anything, I would think that those do it passively would have a strength.
Break down exactly what is probably happening with your beaker example:
- observation of physical traits
- pattern matching against other examples of dissimilar sizes
- analysis as to why this beaker may have an association with a found pattern match of "parent and offspring"
- offspring are often more visually pleasant versions of the grown version (puppy vs dog/kitten vs cat)
- apply ruleset of "parent and offspring" to beaker
- therefore small beaker is cute because it could be offspring of a pair of larger beakers
This demonstrates there is a willingness to accept the unknown and explore it. It applies existing knowledge to make assumptions about future status/behavior. This is a power fact finding skill. Further, your classmates demonstrated this passively meaning it look no effort to find relationships and identify matching traits. They could possibly discover many things in life simply by looking that them and applying critical thinking.
Passivity vs. activeness in consciousness is the distinction I was making.
I understand the connections well enough and I could make them on my own if I saw a purpose to it, such as narrative storytelling or choosing them as representative props. Someone seeing a banal object, devoid of story and history and just merely existing, and then succumbing to emotions over loose connections to human characteristics is what I don’t relate to. A cigar without narrative purpose is just a cigar. I can see others have totems and fetishes (in the sociological sense) of their own but the extent to which I deal with these is recognizing the message when they are used or abused.
I understand the connections well enough and I could make them on my own if I saw a purpose to it, such as narrative storytelling or choosing them as representative props.
This is my point "if I saw a purpose" means that you would miss any purposes that would only be evident when the act was complete.
Someone seeing a banal object, devoid of story and history and just merely existing,
There is no object in existence that is devoid of story and history. Everything came from somewhere whether by nature or human intervention.
and then succumbing to emotions
What is the negative outcome of "succumbing to emotions" from your beaker example? What cost is paid? What energy lost that would have been expending elsewhere?
over loose connections to human characteristics is what I don’t relate to. A cigar without narrative purpose is just a cigar.
Just your suggestion of a cigar triggers in me dozens of different threads of thought. Here's just a few:
- agricultural - Tobacco was planted and cultivate, harvested then dried and processed. Tobacco can only be grown in certain places in the world. The cigar itself may have been wrapped by hand.
- health - Tobacco has many of the obvious negative health aspects, but a bit fewer with cigars than other tobacco consumption methods
- visceral - Cigar smoke does not smell good to me. Its a pungent and then stale. Something to be avoided. Watching smoke rise is fascinating as it drifts with air currents in the room. Cigars weigh much less than I would expect from how they look.
- cultural - Some modern cultures have a high integration with cigars, and even some like Cuba, have a national identity surrounding them. In the west they were, at one time, an expected gift for the announcement of a new birth.
- historical - Growing tobacco massively changed the world a few times in history, and lead to the enslavement of people in some cases/regions.
The whole thought process that produced that entire list happened to me automatically and was started and ended in less than one second. To me, when someone mentions a cigar any of these things could include additional communications cues to the person or their purpose. Its non-verbal subtext.
I deal with these is recognizing the message when they are used or abused.
I think you may be missing messages.
Even among neurotypicals there is neurodiversity.
(inb4 IKEA lamp advert)
Cute isn't an emotion, it's a visual trait.
It’s a set of qualities (small, eyes too big for head, head too big for body, or an approximation of such in non animal objects) that evokes an emotional response (affectionate, protective, nurturing) which is an evolutionary development that prevents us from eating our succulent babies.
Sometimes people will describe a setting, like a restaurant or part of town, or particular house, as “cute.” No anthropromorphics involved.
Cute is a stimulus that causes a release of dopamine, which affects our emotions. It’s not uncommon for someone to simplify that by saying cute = emotion.
That’s correct. I brought up the beaker scenario since the characterization of the inanimate object was adjacent to anthropomorphizing and it was an example in which I was the anomaly of the crowd.