this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2026
220 points (99.1% liked)

Funny

14611 readers
337 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hakunawazo@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Captain Obvious: The Early Days

[–] probable_possum@leminal.space 0 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

Yes. But does it have to be your cow? And can you keep the milk? What does the calf say about that?

[–] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 0 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

"Why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free?", am I right fellas?

[–] probable_possum@leminal.space 1 points 4 hours ago

Is the milk free if you have to work for it? ;)

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 29 points 2 days ago (6 children)

Carl Sagan said that you need a universe first.

[–] peteypete420@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well they didnt ask him, did they?

[–] Hupf@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago

That never bothers Neil deGrasse Tyson either

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is a physics problem not a philosophy problem

[–] A7thStone@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Spherical cows in a vacuum?

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Imagine the universe as a spherical cow.

How thick of a universe ༼ ͡⚆ل͜ ͡⚆༽

[–] portuga@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Physics would be a lot simpler if all cows were spherical

[–] Dagnet@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Me, an engineer: They aren't?

[–] late_list@piefed.zip 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'd imagine milking them would be somewhat more complex though

[–] dalekcaan@feddit.nl 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Yeah, that's why I prefer cubic cows. They're much easier to pack, too.

I can't believe we're having this argument again. Hexagonal cows when two dimensional. Uh, regular icosahedral cows in three, I don't know the names of the shapes in four but you'll put your eye out

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Efficiently packing 17 square cows.

Efficient packing of 17 squares

[–] Rubanski@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 17 hours ago

I do not like this

This is the Superwaffle Debacle all over again!

flips syrup table and leaves

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, that was to bake a pie. He didn't say universe before cow.

Therefore, cow is infinite.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Obviously when discussing milking cows, we assume a spherical cow universe.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

Why not cow-shaped universe?

Asking for a friend.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Right. The kid was saying the same thing, in a way. The question presupposed the existence of the cow. Making an apple pie "from scratch" presupposes the existence of apples. Both presuppose the existence of the universe.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The only person who could be more smarmy in that regard than Neal deGrasse Tyson.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Carl said this, in response to "from scratch", to make the broader point that we shouldn't assume the universe has always existed in its present state. Nothing smarmy about it. And, it worked very well. The quote is well-known 50 years later, the point is taken.

Neal, yeah, a smarmy egotist, no doubt.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

You’re not wrong, and it wasn't really a knock against either of them.

It is being smarmy, because that’s not how people normally think or talk. IMO, Sagan has earned the right. Tyson has not.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago

Reminder that "smarmy" necessarily implies insincerity, not just a funny way of talking.

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 13 points 2 days ago (6 children)

What a strange question. What would be a better answer even, hands, nipples, what?

[–] peteypete420@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Who says there is a better answer? Pretty sure the kid was right.

[–] zip@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

A bucket to catch the milk, maybe?

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 26 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I have a bucket, but not a cow. Pretty sure someone with a cow but no bucket is closer to being ready to milk a cow than I am.

[–] atomicorange@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

But if i was collecting supplies for milking I’d get the cow last. Once you get the cow moving around is a lot more difficult.

[–] kunaltyagi@programming.dev 5 points 1 day ago

The mouth is a small bucket #rawMilk

PSA: don't drink raw milk, even if it's fresh and straight from the teat

You could use the bucket for other things while waiting for a cow to arrive

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And a stool.

Other than that, yeah, you need a cow.

[–] kunaltyagi@programming.dev 2 points 1 day ago

Nah, no stool needed (possible with a sitting technique)

And the cow could give you a big one if you are patient enough😂

[–] BagOfHeavyStones@piefed.social 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Not sure why I need nipples to milk a cow. As long as she has an udder I think it'll work either way.

[–] Saapas@piefed.zip 1 points 1 day ago

Solidarity smdh

Look when I get my titties out it makes the cows feel better

[–] FatVegan@leminal.space -2 points 1 day ago

The will to abuse animals.

[–] Sabata11792@ani.social 2 points 1 day ago

Money or a gun to acquire the cow.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 1 points 1 day ago

Like baking a cake from scratch, first you must start with creating the universe.