top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 98 points 1 year ago (11 children)

Everyone who’s dealt with kids knows you have to bisect the giraffe equally from nose to tail so everyone gets 2 legs, or somebody will cry that it’s unfair.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [+] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 42 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Even if you think height divided by two, why even describe it that way? Giraffes are tall, but not so unfathomably tall that something half its size is incomprehensible. That’s 7-9ish feet. You couldn’t say the size of Andre the Giant?

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Sorry, I don’t get the reference and the Wikipedia page didn’t help!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    In his show Taskmaster he is well known for both writing tasks and making jokes through intentionally obtuse language and uncommon phrasing. Frequently the "obvious" interpretation of a task turns out to be non-obvious, or the answer to a riddle is this kind of nondeterministic situation that trips up the contestants and makes for better funny.

    Which is to say, the author of the headline is a troll, and did it internationally to bait this very kind of conversation. You won't know which way they sliced the giraffe unless you read the entire thing! Of course, after you do, you still won't know.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Ah, no wonder the Wikipedia page didn’t help… the top result when I searched was for a cult leader named Alex Horn. Thanks for the explanation!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    The above explanation is correct, but specifically, he uses weird measurements. Like if a task involves counting a distance, he won't use something reasonable like meters, but how many rubber ducks long.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    People usually measure asteroids by mass (but then, those people are already abnormal, so who knows?), if so, it's something around the size of a cow.

    Or maybe they could use metric...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    A big rock, maybe this is the appropriate time to use stone

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    This is why real scientists use the only reasonable real world measurement - a perfectly spherical cow in a vacuum.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    obviously the scientists meant a spherical giraffe in a vacuum

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    One standard volume giraffe of course, i.e. the volume in m³ an average giraffe would fill (at room temperature and sea level), when passed through a blender. And then half of that

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The scientists had to go through many more proportionate animals before discovering that half a giraffe was a near perfect match for the size of the asteroid.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    As it turns out, the emergence and popularization of Zoos during the Victorian era was largely driven by the work conducted at the Royal Institute for Volumetric Measurements in London.

    Similarly the expansion of the British empire was mostly driven by the need to find ever larger exotic animals in order to establish comparative volumetric weights for the ever larger ships and constructions of that era.

    "25.678 standard volume foxes", was starting to become a bit unwieldy when describing a cargo vessel's size.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Nah, there's a list somewhere of typical weights, dimensions, volumes, etc. of common items. They just put in their value and it pops up. They're nerds first, and scientists second. You KNOW this exists somewhere, and they all have it bookmarked.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Also, most people dont even have a good grasp on how big giraffes are anyways!

    I once went to a zoo that had an elevated platform extending into the giraffe's habitat so that you could stand face to face with them. Their heads are as big as a normal human, like 5 feet from crown to chin!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    So like the size of a horse?

    The average horse is about half the height and weight of the average giraffe. Giraffes are just a really bad unit of measurement, males weight about 400kg more than females and there is a wide height difference over their global population, they are technically four different species we just all call giraffe 🦒

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    Reads Daily Mail clickbait, proceeds to blame "scientists"

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    And is it half the volume, mass or a dimension? Because I've never tried neither blending or carrying a giraffe before (I never got invited to those parties in uni) so I have no grasp on volume or mass.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Surely a giraffe is nearly uniform density making the distinction between volume and mass irrelevant

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Even if it is not if you are just looking at the toal volume or mass it makes no difference when you halve it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    It kind of does if you half the volume. If you end up with the hypothetical gas filled half of a giraffe then it's less mass than if you end up with the meat filled half.

    Unless you were only trying to convey volume to begin with then yes it doesn't make a difference.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Which part of the giraffe is filled with gas though?.

    Are we talking about a cube that is drawn around the giraffe for it's volume or are we talking about the volume of the giraffe if you submerge it in wter and measure the displaced volume?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    No part, thats why I said hypothetical. But it's the only way to make sense of the claim that volume Vs mass is an issue.

    Hopefully we're not imagining halving the bounding box around the giraffe including the air

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    In other words, a large boulder the size of a small boulder

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    The Daily Mail readership will not fathom your question. It is a rag for those who would follow MAGA but want to appear intelligent without have either the natural talent or putting in any work to increase knowledge. Baseline racism is a requirement

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    americans be using anything but the metric system

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    I’m surprised they didn’t use immigrants as the unit.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    The anatomical answer is sagitally down the midline.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Dear gods

    How far will these Americans go to not use the metric system... ffs

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Your bigotry has blinded you so much you couldn’t even see the two biggest, boldest words in the picture.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago

    Oh no; I saw it was the DM... I just assumed that the writer must have been American.

    You are SO correct, as I should have realized by the giraffe unit of measure.

    I'm at a loss as to the Venn diagram where giraffe and imperial would overlap....

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    I once saw a snake half the size of a garden hose.

  • source
  • It's not the scientists, it's a single journalist who is popping out these headlines. Some of those caught attention.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Bilaterally as is the way.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The thing that's bothering me is that they ended a question with a period. Why, random person on the Internet, why?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    How much is it in bananas?

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    I don't get why Americans are doing their best to avoid the metric system. It's always weird discriptions. Like dishwashers, or in this case, half a giraffe. Just use bananas if (cubic) meters are too complex.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You mean wannabe US? (never truly accepted metric system, even discussed to change back to imperial)

    Edit: fair point though. My bad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    People enjoy when things are compared in this way, it’s really not that shocking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Neat, thanks for letting us all know!

    Why do people online caste Americans as the culprit when this is clearly from a British source?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Yeah sorry, based on assumption. Because the US (plus a few tiny islands) refuses to switch to metric even though imperial is obsolete and complicated. It's also usual practice in the US to use weird things for measurements. Cars, dishwashers, etc.

    So in this case it was a wrong assumption on my part.

    I'm deeply sorry.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago*

    It's more of a journalist thing. They take the words out of your mouth to reach their own conclusion fast and deliver an answer that'll fit inside the allocated screen time.

    "When you heard that people use things instead of measurements to explain the size of other things, exactly how shocking was it to you?"

    They describe these random things to avoid people talking about giraffes for hours.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    It's not like we don't have imperial units to use. It's just easier to visualize an object you're familiar with than 20ft/6m or whatever other unit. Giraffes is a strange choice though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Friends of mine are expecting a child. They have an app to compare the current size of the baby. It has the weirdest choices:

    • Wedding cake (they are always the same size? Depends on the budget right? So if you're rich your child is bigger than when you're poor, when it's the wedding cake size?)
    • flat box of chocolates (always the same size? Flat child?)
    • small popcorn bucket
    • small pinguin (there are so many differently sized small pinguïns)
    • cotton candy (last one I had was huge, I feel sorry for the woman with a child that size in their womb)
    • maki
    • jackfruit
    • rhubarb (so it's a stick shaped child?)
    • kitten (a grows the most as a kitten. They are kitten for the first year. It's like saying the size of your baby is the size of a baby.)

    I have no clue what these sizes are exactly. I do know what 10cm or 20cm is.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    You divide the giraffe vertically down the center 🤦‍♂️

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago
    [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Halved with a vertical cut.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Should've used bananas for scale.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Bifurcated down between the eyes

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    What's with the spherical comments in a vacuum?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    One of the first things they will teach you in engineering design is to start by simplifying the model. So if you're trying to figure out something like the surface area is a fish you assume it's a cylinder then the math is easy. Same thing with assuming the object is in a vacuum. If you do that you ignore wind resistance and it makes the math easier. You can come back later and take the wind resistance into account.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Easy. Just imagine only the spots part.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Solomon’s giraffe…

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Catie can STFU because she doesn't know what a question mark looks like.

  • source
  • 19 comments in c/anythingbutmetric@discuss.tchncs.de view that post