[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 67 points 1 month ago

I mean... I can see it both ways.

When people engage with content, they have expectations going in - they expect to know if the content is fictional, truthful, or intentionally ambiguous.

For example, if someone watches a documentary and finds out it was all made up, they'd be right to be upset, because it presents itself as honest.
Likewise if someone watches a fantasy movie, they don't have the expectation of honesty.
And if someone watches something like the Blair witch project, they go in knowing that it's dubiously truthful. It's a bit of a grey area because the deceit is part of the art.

Streaming is similar, vtubers are obviously fictional - nobody really has expectations around what they're really like.
But if someone builds a following around being authentically themselves, and then it's discovered that they're lying about significant parts of their content, I can understand some degree of outrage.

I don't really watch streamers because the dynamic between streamers and viewers seems toxic AF, where streamers are kinda forced to pander and appear personable... But I still understand being upset when you find out what you got isn't what you were sold

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 57 points 2 months ago

People are missing the more important question:
Why did she put the cucumber back in the fridge?

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 64 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

She hasn't been seen since her surgery a few months ago. They palace recently released a pic of her, but AP and other photo publishers had to retract it because it was obviously manipulated. It appears they photoshopped in her face from a magazine photoshoot a few years ago.

I don't usually follow this stuff, but it turns out that when a photo gets retracted it's called a "kill notice" or a "photo kill". I didn't know that, so when I saw headlines saying that AP put out a kill notice on the royal family it got my attention lol

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 67 points 7 months ago

I mean, you don't HAVE to do any of that stuff in Windows, it's just helps a bit.

I'm sure there are plenty of windows horror stories. But almost every Windows computer I've had in the last decade, both custom and OEM, has worked pretty well out of the box. And almost every Ubuntu computer I've had over the last decade has had problems that weren't trivial to fix.

I like Linux, but when people compare these problems like they're the same just are missing the point.

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 63 points 8 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

If your spouse was in a terrible accident during a power outage and you had to construct an alternative power source to power their life support - how would you do it?

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 67 points 8 months ago

More like... Why do men write female characters like this?

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 56 points 8 months ago

shai-huludussy

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 68 points 8 months ago

You need to be slowly turned on a rotisserie.

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 50 points 8 months ago

FINE, I'LL DO IT.

But not because you told me to.

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 56 points 9 months ago

In the future, bots are going to get so annoyed with people pretending to be bots when they just want to talk to other bots!

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 64 points 9 months ago

Sequoia 😌

296
book memes (lemmy.ca)

Not sure this works with the show.

19

I understand how lucky imaging gets the results it gets, but I'm wondering specifically how the 10% of frames are chosen.

They're not picked based on clarity/blur, because the problem is one of distorted images not blurry images, causing issues when averaging the stack.

Searching online gives me lots of answers about how lucky imaging produces clearer images, but not how the lucky frames are chosen.

Anyone know how lucky frames get chosen?

26

As the title asks, what is the average mass of each kind of cloud? Ignoring things like overcast days, and only considering clouds large enough to identify. Or maybe rather than "average" it'd be better to say "what is the mass of an archiypical cloud of each type?" Eg an archiypical cumulus, cirrus, cumulonimbus, etc.

337
It's time (lemmy.ca)

Like wiping a marker

[-] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 53 points 1 year ago

Inject the marijuana needles right into my bum!

170

With all this talk of UFOs, I have to wonder about the Simpsons prediction accuracy.

116
uh huh, uh huh (lemmy.ca)

I know I just posted one, but I thought of another

131
git gud (lemmy.ca)
64

I know I'm not the first one to wonder, but really...

0

The report button is right next to the share button, so I keep accidentally tapping report. If common action like share could be moved out of the hamburger list, as they are on the website, I think that'd make life easier.

Would it be better to make these requests directly on GitHub? I see other people making requests here so I wasn't clear

235
77
222
view more: ‹ prev next ›

PeriodicallyPedantic

joined 1 year ago