No Stupid Questions

48396 readers

1760 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)

Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.

Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.

Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.

Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.

Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.

Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.

Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.

Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.

Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.

Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

L4s@lemmy.world

Can I trust things)/people as far as I can throw them? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by button_masher@lemmy.ml to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Trying to make sense of the quote.. bear with me:

So there are two versions of that quote floating about:

Trust someone as far as you can throw them

Do NOT trust someone as far as you can throw them

Question 1: I agree it's contextual but which makes more sense? First implies a limited trust and the negation implies negative correlation with distance. I think.

I like the Wodehouse quote: “I wouldn’t trust him as far as I could throw him, and I’m no shot-put champion.” - P. G. Wodehouse, The Code of the Woosters (1938)

So from the first link, let's trust the baby (a random baby.. not yours) as far as you can throw it. Will assume shot put than a hammer throw for the baby as it makes more sense. (Hammer throwing babies is for emergencies) Record for 7kg shotput for men is ~20m. Most people could do 10m with little training. Which is a fair distance to trust a baby. Anything more and I might be too late to react.

A random toddler, you can throw less distance and therefore trust it less? And what about a random human, they might not let you throw them.

Let's take negation.. What about computers? Back in the day, computers were massive so can't trust a mainframe computer as far as you could throw it. So I mistrust it less (due to complexity) than say an ultrabook, which I could throw far enough. Of course based on your experience with computers, the negation of this applies.

Question 2: So on this scale (throwing ability), what could I trust the most? Nothing? My voice? Tangible things?

Question 3: does the metaphor hold or am I just trying to make it fit?

"Yes, I trust the rocket, we threw into space together.. "
"I don't trust SD cards, discs were better (or vice versa)"
"I used to trust my scooter but ever since losing my hands..."

Maybe I'm overthinking this and the fact that the negation can also hold true means that it's literally a matter of trust than my ability to throw.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] lemmyng@piefed.ca 1 points 2 days ago

The implication of the phrase is not that trust is variable depending on the subject's or object's physical abilities. Its meaning is more that one doesn't trust the other person's motivation, so the trust only goes as far as one's own ability to affect the other's figurative position ("throwing" them.)