Not see it. But I hear this one.
“it’s always in the last place you look”
No shit Sherlock. Why would I keep looking after I found it?
I always thought that was the joke?
I must say, in retrospect it kind of seems obvious, but this has somehow blown my mind
What people really mean when they say this is
it’s in the last place you think to look
This again is a misnomer because, not just because you stop looking… but because people find it hard to admit things are lost. All part of the half serious, half ridiculous psuedo science of Findology (disclaimer: my own blog)
Embarrassingly it took me years to realize what that quote meant. I had always interpreted it to mean that the item is found in an unexpected place. But of course what it really means is that you stop looking once the item is found, therefore that’s the last place you looked 🤦
One time I kept looking just to prove that statement wrong. I think I was 4yo.
And it is a false statement:
sometimes you stop looking without finding anything so in those cases it isn’t in the last place you look
so the clam “It’s always in the last place you look” is obviously false.
otherwise you could say up front “I’m only gonna look in one place!” and then you would HAVE to find it in this last place you look!
“We only use x% of our brain.”
Simply not true as shown since years by neurology
There are moments where people use more of their bran at once than they usually do.
We call these moments “seizures”.As an epileptic married to a monitor tech, we both had a good laugh when I shared this.
Thanks stranger.
This reminds me of the “you eat X amount of spiders in your sleep every year”. It’s also been debunked so many times and I see it popping up from time to time.
Even more ironic, this was created by some professor (?) to prove that starting fake viral facts was easy or something…
If you just add the words on average, suddenly it sounds more realistic, because who knows if there’s a guy somewhere sleepwalking in a spider infested place
Good old Spiders George
If i recall that explanation for the spider fact is itself just made up with no source.
God no… Please… :(
Man, I always thought that one was suspect. If I eat 10 per year and have been alive 40+ years, then surely one of those times I would have woken up.
Oh, and X% of dust is dead skincells. There is a good Veritasium video on this clai.
I’ve almost never heard anyone quote that, but I’ve heard numerous people arguing against that statement. So much that I’m wondering it it has mandela-affected people to think it’s a more common misconception than it really is.
I do remember it being more common back when I was in high school, and also there was a movie which mentioned that which could have helped with that
I also havent heard it being said seriously for years though
Right, it was the plot for the movie Lucy, where the protagonist increased the brain capacity beyond 10% and upon reaching 100%, she turned into an USB drive. I remember that now.
Such a good movie with such bad writing…
I am surprised no one yet has posted the infuriatingly worthless expression of affectless sympathy:
thoughts and prayers
As a nonnative speaker, the first time I heard the expression was on Bojack Horseman and it confused the hell out of me.
Religious bs
Thing is if prayers did anything, life would be way better (utopia)
If prayers were always effective, life would be both better and far worse. You’d be surprised at the horrific things people pray for.
And some of the “good” things we pray for go against what we desperately need.
So you think you can tell heaven from hell?
- Wish You Were Here - Pink Floyd
Very true. It’d be so bad
I agree most of the time, but when I have to sign a sympathy card at work for someone i barely know, what the hell am i supposed to say?
I can’t change the work culture so i just say something generic like that most of the time lol
Btw I’m not even religious
“Life’s not fair.” It seems that more often than not the person saying it is in a position to make the situation fair. Usually it is people in positions of power saying it and it feels more like an excuse for their inaction.
This is true. My mum used it a bit.
I don’t see it anymore after leaving the hell that is Reddit, but I saw “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes” multiple times in every thread.
I haven’t seen “fuck around and find out” since the old Reddit days, either.
Thank goodness for that. Another comment that was posted over and over and over in every thread.
“Equal rights means equal lefts” or whatever tf it was, especially during the Depp/Heard thing. Basically condoning hitting women. But then if you disagree with it, it gets spun into endorsing women abusing men. Reddit comments can be fucking gross.
I mean I get that if used in a context where a person does something with great risk attached and with few and rare good possible outcomes (stupid games). And then they get a bad outcome (stupid prize).
For example Jackass-like stunts.
It’s just a stupid phrase that I hate, parroted to death multiple times in every Reddit thread ever.
Usually as a way of being racist, too.
I don’t know who has to hear this but
I don’t know who has to hear this but
that’s a phrase, not a quote.
Who says you can’t quote a phrase?
For me its the one that promoted me to write this, the futurama quote “you’re are technically correct, the best kind of correct”
I hate how people use it over at forums, it is repeated ad nauseam, even if it doesn’t make much sense. It’s probably from people using it constantly that I hate the quote, and not something that has to do with the meaning.
I could be wrong but i think it’s originally from Futurama
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/0ZEuWJ4muYc
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
I think I said that lol
My least favorite is
Just be yourself!
Even in grade school I knew this was hogwash. I didn’t act the same in class as during recess, or in church as when at the dinner table. Exactly which me was I supposed to be? When someone asks, “What am I supposed to do?” They are really asking, “How should I behave?” And if you’ve never been on a date before, or this is your first job interview, then it’s not obvious.
A: “So, how did the interview go?”
B: “Not so well, he threw my resume away, in front of me, and ordered me to leave.”
A: “What? Why?”
B: “Well, I did just as your said, I was being myself. I walked in, gave him the ol’ finger guns, then started with my best fart joke.”
A: “Why the hell would you do that at an interview?”
B: “Because that routine always slays in the dorms and I was trying to be myself.”
ask yourself: is it possible to be anybody else? no? then this saying is non-nonsensical!
I don’t know, as a ttrpg’er, I’m being someone else every two weeks for three hours are a time. ;)
Anybody on the autism spectrum just laughs sadly, shakes head quietly, when told ‘just be your self’
What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.
Yeah maybe, but it also makes you stranger.
Also not necessarily true. You might loose a limb and survive, but it could mentally wreck you and you’re definitely weaker with one vs. two arms.
Not to mention all the war veterans with PTSD for the rest of their life
Especially virusses and bacteria: Your immune system gets a bit stronger but organs probably have small irreversable damages because there is scartissue where the infection was the worst.
I can only imagine how much people with severe, long-term diseases hate that phrase.
I feel like it’s just missing a very big caveat:
What doesn’t kill you, and lets you reemerge in a healthy state once it passes, makes you stronger.That I can more or less agree with. Whatever happened that prompted people to say this will probably still leave a mark though.
“Don’t be evil.” -Google
Both hate and laugh it.
Agreed. This sounds good but immediately falls apart at the first scrutiny. It’s the same with “Don’t be a dick.” Everyone nods their heads and thinks, “Oh, that’s so obvious!” Of course, everyone agrees because they’re imagining what they believe is ‘evil’ or ‘being a dick’ and just assume everyone else agrees. Imagine their surprised-Pikachu face when they learn that other humans use different criteria.
But, if you think you can sum up thousands of years of ethics and legal theories with one pithy sentence, then go for it.
The good old GNU/Linux quote.
I like Stallman’s ideas on free software but this whole GNU/Linux thing is an absolute waste of time and I hate how it still gets brought up.
Let me interject for a moment!
What you guys are referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux. Thank you for taking your time to cooperate with with me, your friendly GNU+Linux neighbor, Richard Stallman.
The quote attributed to Stallman is made up and is a distortion of his actual views.
He created GNU as an operating system. His position is that when talking about the GNU OS, it is appropriate to call it GNU/linux if it’s running the linux kernel, though he is also fine with calling it GNU.
The italicized parts are made up, the rest is true. He says so much in the article you linked.
In any case, we’re repeating the same old discussion I’m tired of. Should’ve seen it coming.
“pull yourself up by the bootstraps” it’s literally impossible
I always thought that was the point of the phrase.
I think it was when it was first coined, but it’s been used unironically for awhile.
It is. It was initially used as a paradoxical statement.
It’s weird that it’s still used unironically today (and in fact feels like it’s made a relatively recent revival). Like, you’d think they’d at least switch to a phrase that makes sense.
“Survival of the fittest” (when used without trying to understand its actual meaning).
What is its meaning?
This is from Darwin, I think. It describes the mechanism of selection in evolution: the organisms that are better adapted to their environments are the ones more likely to survive.
Bady likely hates it because it’s often misused, by transforming it in a prescriptive statement (from “the fittest survives” to "the fittest deserves to survive) and/or ignoring that what’s considered the fittest depends on the environment (e.g. a fish isn’t fit in a dry environment, but a cactus isn’t fit in the sea).
Also the word ‘fitness’ is colored a bit by our current corporal culture (‘fit’ is something one can become of one aspires to be it). Whilst in the Darwinian reading it’s more like an accidental occurrence (a mutation made the species more fit by accident).
Specifically natural selection. Sexual selection is also a type survival of the fittest, but its fitness in attracting mates and assuring survival of offspring, regardless of how well this adapts to the environment. And artificial selection grants survival to the traits the selector wants, again not necessarily favoring environmental adaptations.
Worse, he probably refers to social darwinism.
A very nasty school of thought that’s (partly) responsible for everything from genocide to eugenics.Social “Darwinism” relies on the fallacy that I mentioned, where you treat a descriptive statement as if it was prescriptive. (And yes, it’s nasty.)
‘‘what doesn’t kill you, make you stronger’’ it’s just so overused and saturated
Live love laugh
Was gonna say that 🤣
It is the first quote that came to my mind, I don’t even know if I see it often in real life but I do see it on the internet
