|
LeastActionHero posted:Similarly, there are proposals to build a telescope on the moon by using a rotating vat of liquid mercury to act as a naturally stable perfect mirror. You need to put it on the moon so it can be exposed to the sky, but not exposed to an atmosphere that will oxidize the metal. That sounds an awful lot like a scheme from Big Mercury
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2024 07:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 09:29 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm curious how many people can accurately gauge circumference by eye. Or I suppose how many people are using calipers on their sexual partners. Go/no‐go gauge
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2024 07:27
|
|
|
ultrafilter posted:Found on Facebook: I loved that extrapolating the right hand side makes it a cock and balls picture.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2024 10:27
|
|
|
LeastActionHero posted:By interesting coincidence, a fluid being rotated naturally assumes the shape of a parabola, Rotating genderfluid is how these charts were made: Piell posted:From the transphobic Cass report, when you know how to make exactly one curve
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2024 10:56
|
|
|
Phy posted:I will never not lol at the alien guy from Babylon 5 who had a meter long prehensile dick and used it to cheat at cards His penises were much longer than a meter, and he had 6 of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2024 20:56
|
|
|
Phy posted:Who these top left corner people out there, all rocking a can of skoal Ah, the ol' Polish Curse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2024 22:50
|
|
|
ultrafilter posted:Found on Facebook: Great, perfect penis is a ball
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:19
|
|
|
canis minor posted:Great, perfect penis is a ball That's not how circumference works
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:22
|
|
|
Perhaps in your simpler Euclidean genital space
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 18:23
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm curious how many people can accurately gauge circumference by eye. Or I suppose how many people are using calipers on their sexual partners. Circumference is distance around. Calipers won't help unless the dick is perfectly cylindrical. Just use a measuring tape.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:27
|
|
|
Dicks have less irregular cross sections than tree trunks, and those are routinely ranked in diameter at breast height.
Platystemon has a new favorite as of 19:38 on Apr 16, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:36
|
|
|
I must be reading this dick chart wrong because the lengths seem totally reasonable but the circumferences seem insane. No one has a dick as thick as a 2L bottle. What are we measuring here??
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:37
|
|
|
For reference, canis minor, a cylinder with equal height and circumference looks like this:  According to that chart, the ideal penis has an aspect ratio a little bit longer/less girthy than this. Also, the average penis is 5.2" long and 4.6" in circumference, so firmly in the "E" category. so yeah that chart is hella bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:39
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:For reference, canis minor, a cylinder with equal height and circumference looks like this: I was going to say, that looks like the canis minor. I can tell by sight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:42
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I must be reading this dick chart wrong because the lengths seem totally reasonable but the circumferences seem insane. No one has a dick as thick as a 2L bottle. What are we measuring here?? It's circumference, not width. Take the number on the chart and divide by 3.14 for width.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:42
|
|
|
Captain Hygiene posted:Perhaps in your simpler Euclidean genital space https://y.yarn.co/efe83207-5eaa-4538-ad85-86676f06c172_text.mp4
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2024 19:58
|
|
|
I can't believe they didn't even study circularity, dangle angle, profile (mushroom vs carrot), upper vs lower camber, position of maximum chord, etc. Like are they even trying to be scientific?
Sagebrush has a new favorite as of 00:25 on Apr 17, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 00:23
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I can't believe they didn't even study circularity, dangle angle, profile (mushroom vs carrot), upper vs lower camber, position of maximum chord, etc. Like are they even trying to be scientific? We don’t know what other charts were in the source article.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 00:55
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I can't believe they didn't even study circularity, dangle angle, profile (mushroom vs carrot), upper vs lower camber, position of maximum chord, etc. Like are they even trying to be scientific? GD&T solves many problems with fitment and assembly
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 02:40
|
|
|
canis minor posted:Great, perfect penis is a ball 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 02:53
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Dicks have less irregular cross sections than tree trunks, and those are routinely ranked in diameter at breast height. My dick's diameter at breast height is zero.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 02:57
|
|
|
piL posted:My dick's diameter at breast height is zero. Perhaps you simply need a shorter partner. Or a stepladder.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 03:01
|
|
|
When you understand pie charts: Source
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 09:53
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:Also, the average penis is 5.2" long and 4.6" in circumference, so firmly in the "E" category. But then that would mean that most women find sex with men unsatisfying. Surely they would have said something by now if that were the case.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 16:26
|
|
|
piL posted:My dick's diameter at breast height is zero.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 16:51
|
|
|
jjack229 posted:But then that would mean that most women find sex with men unsatisfying. Surely they would have said something by now if that were the case. They might just have, but who listens to what women say?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 18:58
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:It's circumference, not width. Take the number on the chart and divide by 3.14 for width.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 19:08
|
|
|
I've got a d for your pi right here 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 19:12
|
|
|
BonHair posted:They might just have, but who listens to what women say? I do. Because without hearing what they say, how do you interpret what they mean?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2024 20:37
|
|
|
KennyMan666 posted:When you understand pie charts: honestly I love this
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2024 01:57
|
|
|
KennyMan666 posted:When you understand pie charts: lmao i didn't notice the caption for the blue chunk, which somehow elevates the entire chart
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2024 07:01
|
|
|
It simply means you won't be able to use the digital wallet for any of the named purposes, only the unspecified blue ones, which are however equal in significance to the sum of all the other tasks, which therefore serve as a helpful point of reference.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2024 08:33
|
|
|
Enabling the ID to sign things is actually pretty nice. When the German ID was rolled out that was strangely forgotten, despite being a very compelling use case. You can use your ID to authenticate against a number of government sites, but what I really want is a digital signature I can sign stuff with that can be validated by anyone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2024 09:47
|
|
|
Yeah we do have that here in Sweden called a Bank-ID, you either enter your personal number or scan a QR code, and then enter your PIN on your mobile device, and it's for confirming your identity for a number of things. Signing in to places, digitally signing documents, and the like. It's nice and convenient. And we didn't even need an incorrectly designed chart!
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2024 12:49
|
|
|
the danish nemID system from 2010 was just a laminated fold-up with OTP codes that you used with username + password, but that was too easy to man-in-the-middle so now there's a bunch of steps. currently, mitID works by entering your username on the site, then opening & authenticating the app* via pin or biometrics so you can scan a qr code shown on the website, and then finally approve the access * no notifications, presumably to prevent people from muscle-memorying approval even tho it wont work without the qr code Carthag Tuek has a new favorite as of 19:05 on Apr 18, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2024 19:03
|
|
|
I stand by the chart, it is fantastic
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2024 19:15
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:It simply means you won't be able to use the digital wallet for any of the named purposes, only the unspecified blue ones, which are however equal in significance to the sum of all the other tasks, which therefore serve as a helpful point of reference. yeah this seems like the only sensible read of that chart
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2024 20:06
|
|
|
"Sensible" doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2024 22:15
|
|
|
The labeling, which is clearly "these AND much more", must always take precedence. Without words, the chart means nothing, so we must take the words at face value. It's a chart of answers given to "Q1: which of the following do you believe will be a use case of the EU digital wallet?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2024 03:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 09:29 |
|
|
The area under "these and more" is the same as the rest, implying that "more" is actually nothing. (Please don't make charts instead of lists)
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2024 12:40
|
|