this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2026
289 points (99.0% liked)

Dull Men's Club

3627 readers
661 users here now

An unofficial chapter of the popular Dull Men's Club.

https://dullmensclub.com/

1. Relevant commentary on your own dull life. Posts should be about your own dull, lived experience. This is our most important rule. Direct questions, random thoughts, comment baiting, advice seeking, many uses of "discuss" rarely comply with this rule.

2. Original, Fresh, Meaningful Content.

3. Avoid repetitive topics.

4. This is not a search engine
Use a search engine, a tradesperson, Reddit, friends, a specialist Facebook group, apps, Wikipedia, an AI chat, a reverse image search etc. to answer simple questions or identify objects. Also see rule 1, “comment baiting”.

There are a number of content specific communities with subject matter experts who can help you.

Some other communities to consider before posting:

5. Keep it dull. If it puts us to sleep, it’s on the right track. Examples of likely not dull: jokes, gross stuff (including toes), politics, religion, royalty, illness or injury, killing things for fun, or promotional content. Feel free to post these elsewhere.

6. No hate speech, sexism, or bullying No sexism, hate speech, degrading or excessively foul language, or other harmful language. No othering or dehumanizing of anyone or negativity towards any gender identity.

7. Proofread before posting. Use good grammar and punctuation. Avoid useless phrases. Some examples: - starting a post with "So" - starting a post with pointless phrases, like "I hope this is allowed" or “this is my first post” Only share good quality, cropped images. Do not share screenshots of images; share the original image.

.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I’d like to ask the good people of this community that, if you do know the solution or figure it out, that you not share the answer here. Feel free to announce your success, but there’s something to be said for discovering the answer completely unaided, even if it takes years.

It’s embarrassingly obvious once you see it though.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] exaybachae@startrek.website 2 points 1 hour ago

Well, I got it correct with a guess based on a casual glance at what was there, not how the numbers actually relate or calculations based on rules or patterns.

Then I had to figure out how it actually worked.

Which was harder -- I wish I had kept scrolling.

[–] M137@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Wow, I just woke up and saved this to have a nice puzzle to work on for a while but I figured it out in like a minute... Kinda disappointed that happened to be honest.

[–] skulkbane@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Oh i see,

Its

solution12

You add up the digits.

(7+2)+(9+9)=9+18=27

9+(4+5)=9+9=18

(1+8)+(3+9)=9+12=21

(2+1)+(3+6)=3+9=12

3+(2+8)=3+10=13

(1+3)+(2+1)=4+3=7

Yay

[–] rrrurboatlibad 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I figured it out in about 3 minutes. I think I'm autistic or something

[–] ladicius@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Took me 30 seconds. Autistic as f.

[–] banshee@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

Fun puzzle - thanks for sharing!

[–] wabafee@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (3 children)

I let AI solve it for me now I feel confident that I'm much dumber than an AI.

[–] CucumberFetish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 45 seconds ago

The LLMs most probably already have this puzzle in their dataset or can look it up on the internet. That's like asking you if you know how to solve it only after you have seen the solution

[–] banshee@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

In all fairness, this seems like an ideal problem for a model to solve.

[–] ladicius@lemmy.world -1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

That's a thing to boast about, for sure. We are proud of you, buddy! cough

[–] wabafee@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago
[–] hedge_lord@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

Ahaha that's so cheeky!

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

I can give one hint if you want.

The solution reminded me of "Numerology". Which I am familiar with and probably why I was able to solve it in about a minute.

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Took me about 20 minutes. There's a rule you find first that would work if the 7 was an 8. But it isn't. So there's another rule.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago

until I read your comment I was puzzled as to why anyone would consider something so dumb a "masterpiece", but yeah, it's quite a clever piece of misleading on the puzzle-setter's part.

[–] nieminen@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago
[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I still keep thinking it's 15, which I know is wrong, and then I math in 14,but I can't figure out a function. Does someone want to dm me or spoiler me the function how it works? My brain is too full of more important stuff and I cannot make room for this. But I must know!

[–] glibg10b@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (2 children)

Someone else commented it the pattern. The answer is not 14 or 15.

HintThere is no function. You won't find the answer by trying different combinations math operations on the values. You need to think more outside the box.

Hint #2Ignore the values.

Hint #3Focus on just three numbers. How can 13 and 21 produce 7?

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I think I got itWait was I two or three off?

[–] glibg10b@lemmy.zip 1 points 27 minutes ago

spoilerYup!

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Thank you so very much!!!

[–] Techlos@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 hours ago

Oooh, sneaky but simple

[–] emeralddawn45@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

The number of comments in this thread where people confidently declare they solved it with the wrong answer is absolutely baffling. Especially since it literally calls out the exception to that 'solution' in the post itself. Did those people not even look at the 7? That's the real strength of this puzzle, making idiots who think they're geniuses loudly prove their stupidity.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Being real, if this post hadn't made it clear that the solution was non obvious, I likely would have given up before getting it, just because my chicken is being more interesting than usual.

But, knowing that there was a "trick" to it, meaning that it takes some lateral thinking, I didn't take my usual approach to number puzzles, which means it only took one look at the upper left for the likely solution to be visible. Then it was just running down and testing with the rest, then plugging in for the solution.

No way in hell I would have had the patience for it when my baby bird is being a silly dinosaur without that front loading assumption the solution wouldn't be evident with a systematic approach. Oh, I'd have given it maybe fifteen minutes, but with a fuzzy butt in play, that would have been it

[–] texture@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)
[–] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 hours ago

No, I who. dehumanization no good

What? You've never been distracted by a chicken before?

[–] Ioughttamow@fedia.io 1 points 6 hours ago
load more comments
view more: next ›