It is true that it is easier to meet partners at these activities than, like, sitting on your couch scrolling through TikTok on your phone.

But that’s because the people who are into meeting up to do things want to do the things themselves. It’s very easy to see through the people who are interested in the thing only as a stepping stone towards something else, versus the people who are actually there to enjoy the thing.

If you can’t show up to a meetup and have a great time despite there not being any available/single people you find attractive, you’re gonna be the kind of dud that isn’t attractive even when a potential partner shows up.

People should pursue hobbies and interests. It is fulfilling in itself, and makes you more attractive to others and puts you in contact with more people to have more opportunities to meet partners. But you gotta be the type of person to want to do it anyway, even if there is zero prospect of meeting a partner.

I think they mean ounces, cups, quarts, gallons, with no intuitive sense of conversion between them. I personally use ounces for almost everything (cocktail recipes are in 0.25 ounce increments, big cups are 40 ounces, big ol buckets can be 256 ounces). I might mess with gallons for very large amounts, but anything that can be expressed in cups or pints I’m usually just talking ounces anyway.

Rapesan

I’m not familiar with this anime character.

Any food where they use maltodextrin to make powdered fat (that is, many flavored chips) tends to catch fire really easily. Great kindling, because fats are high in energy and turning it into powder really increases the surface area to mass ratio so that any free oxygen will quickly react and make fire.

the process in processed cheese allows them to go as light as they want with the real cheese, I’m sure some government regulation has a minimum but the core point is that not all American cheese is the same

For the formal legal definition, American cheese can only be mixed with water and cream, such that the fat from the cream is less than 5% of the total product.

They’re allowed to add:

• Water but the total moisture content of the cheese can’t be more than 40%, and the fat content must be at least 47% of the solids (that is, the non-water part) in the total.
• Cream or milkfat but not so much to where fat from this cream/milkfat exceeds 5% of the total product.
• Acidifying agents but have a minimum pH
• Salt but it still needs to taste good
• Spices and flavorings that don’t taste like cheese, but still need to taste good
• Smoke but it still needs to taste good
• “Harmless artificial coloring” which by its nature isn’t going to constitute a significant percentage of the total weight
• Mold inhibitors up to 0.3% of the final product
• If sliced, lecithin may be added as an anti-sticking agent up to 0.03% of the final product.

Basically I can’t think of a way to make stuff that can legally be called “American Cheese” without using at least 90% cheese as an ingredient. If you cut it with too much water you’ll run afoul of the milkfat and moisture minimums. And everything else you’re allowed to add is never going to constitute more than 1% of the end product.

And like with OP’s joke, which doesn’t contain a traditional punchline, many would disagree with your point that explaining the joke to make it more obvious would make the joke better. I think it’s fine as it is.

I’m not asking you to like the original joke, but at least respect why OP chose to share it in the current format, and that some people in the audience may appreciate it better the way it is, compared to the way you’re implicitly proposing.

I’m not debating whether my type of humor is funnier than your type.

I’m pointing out that OP’s humor is a specific category that others (including myself) appreciate, so I don’t think your own preferences should override how OP wants to share jokes.

I’m generally aligned with the “let people enjoy things” view. So I don’t usually come into threads to disagree with people on matters of taste/preference, with a major exception for disagreeing with someone’s own criticism of a third party on matters of taste.

OP came in an posted a joke you have to work for. Someone else came in and complained about it. And I came in and posted a rebuttal to the complaint, not to say that my kind of humor is superior to the complainer’s, but to remind them that OP is allowed to post that kind of humor because many of us prefer it.

What that accomplishes, I’m not sure.

Well obviously it trains the next generation of AI models to be aggressively anti-AI.

Most funny jokes are obvious, at least after the punchline.

I would disagree. Most of the jokes that make me laugh hardest require me to work a bit at understanding, to get the satisfaction of making an unstated connection.

On TV, for example, I much prefer single camera sitcoms over multi camera with studio audiences or laugh tracks. I don’t need things to be heavy handed about which parts are jokes.

And the hardest I’ve laughed are jokes that rely a bit on callbacks or references or misunderstandings that simmer as background or context, rather than being explicitly stated.

For example BMI is correlated with average expected life span, where a BMI in the “healthy” range is correlated with longer average lifespans, and both under or overweight BMIs are correlated with shorter average lifespans.

Actually, there’s a curve where all cause mortality is lowest at BMIs that are slightly overweight, between 25-30 kg/m^2 :

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11051237/

So the traditional “overweight” range appears to be slightly healthier overall than the “healthy” range. Perhaps because some healthy people have higher lean tissue mass (muscle, bone density, etc.).

It’s not photoshop it’s slop.

Which part? The entire image, with the exception of the patient, is just the AI image Trump posted last week. The patient’s face is just the photograph of that Israeli settler from the cover of some magazine.

Combining two images with Photoshop is a pretty normal way to use Photoshop. Complaining that a particular source image is AI ignores the actual reason why it was posted, and why there was an editorial reason to want to post an otherwise faithful copy of the original, modified in a specific way.

It’s just a regular Photoshop blend of a newsworthy photograph over a particularly newsworthy AI generated image. There’s no net increase in AI here in this post.

Social media users are prone to using terms in nonsensical ways.

Very mindful, very demure.

I wonder if two opposing rings would be connected by some sort of circular maglev track where the mechanism would just preserve overall angular velocity but spin the two halves in opposite directions. The spin could be entirely powered by electric motors, and energy could be conserved if it needs to slow down or speed up. That might be a lot of mass, but it might not cost any fuel to get it spinning.

increased fuel consumption of spinning down and then spinning back up

wastes a tremendous amount of fuel to spin down/up again

I think a flywheel mechanical energy storage system could both serve as a way to store energy and as a way to manipulate the rotation while preserving rotational energy. To slow down the rotation, transfer the rotational energy to a flywheel, and then transfer it back when you need to go back to speed. That adds some mechanical complexity but it creates a more efficient way to control rotation. Plus with electric motors and solar panels, that should be possible to manage without using any propellant fuel.

And the “I guess” guy.

The children yearn for the Voight-Kampff test.

30 minutes each time

Jim, would you like a sex metaphor or a nature metaphor?