this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2025
866 points (91.9% liked)

memes

15440 readers
3592 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] burgersc12@mander.xyz 54 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Does no one understand this is a joke, talking about parallel lines and mathematical proofs is pointless when its a fucking meme

[–] dontbelievethis@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's not pointless because you can laugh about a joke and then learn something about math.

They don't cancel each other out. They can be at the same place and still work on their own.

[–] weird@sub.wetshaving.social 16 points 1 day ago

I love memes that are funny on their own, but also provide discussion material.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 8 points 1 day ago

You're having fun wrong!!1one

[–] the_trash_man@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Its wrong though so the joke falls flat

[–] burgersc12@mander.xyz 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Didn't realize jokes have to be literally correct

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

Just the good ones.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 1 day ago (2 children)

We do understand it's a meme and a joke. Just not a very good one, because one can easily poke holes into it.

[–] daddycool@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Just not a very good one, because one can easily poke holes into it.

That's not how jokes work.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] daddycool@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

No, it depends on if you have humor. Yes, humor is individual, I know. But people without tend to over analyze and try to pick the joke apart, often missing the point.

A joke doesn't have to pass every technicality. You thinking it's bad if it doesn't, only applies to your humor (or lack there of).

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ooh, watch out, the humor police is here! Everything the deem funny is humor and if you don't find funny what they do you don't even have humor! Wee-ooo wee-ooo!

[–] daddycool@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I can be presented with a bad joke without the urge to pick it apart. You couldn't. Just saying.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

And you cannot take criticism. Just saying.

(Also, I'm not picking apart the joke, I'm explaining why some people do.)

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

And you cannot take criticism.

What criticism?

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] daddycool@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's not my joke, so I couldn't care less. I'm talking about jokes in general and the fact that you don't understand how it works.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Lol. You really think you're some kind of authority or something. See, that is funny.

[–] daddycool@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, I'm just saying you're wrong. But it seems like you cannot take criticism.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, I'm just saying you're wrong.

Based on what expertise? Which criteria do you apply?

That meme is incorrect, and therefore it doesn't land for me and a lot of other people. You cannot say "you're wrong" on that.

[–] daddycool@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You said it wasn't a good joke, because one can easily poke holes into it.

This is not correct. Being able to easily pick apart a jokes doesn't automatically make it bad. Lots of good jokes will not pass that test either.

You not liking a joke based on that logic, is on you alone. But it's not an universal rule of jokes. Do you think you’re some kind of authority or something?

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

No, it's an observation I made often enough, that factually incorrect jokes don't land and get picked apart.

I'm tired of this though. If you are satisfied with stupidity, fine. Keep laughing about dumb shit then. I'm out.

[–] daddycool@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Well, it's factually correct that I've been having a laugh at your expense, so analyze that any way you want.

[–] burgersc12@mander.xyz 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Its supposed to be absurd, taking it seriously makes the already bad joke even worse

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It's not about taking it seriously. The meme wants to be a technically correct-meme, where a thing fulfills another things definition and thereby could be deemed the other thing - which creates the absurdity the meme lives off of. But in order for that kind of humour, there cannot be obvious holes in the logic of the joke and these obvious holes are very present in this meme.

[–] MBM@lemmings.world 3 points 1 day ago

Any maths joke of this type will have obvious holes in it, that's just how maths works

[–] burgersc12@mander.xyz -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well the text in the image of the "definition" of a square is clearly tailored to fit this joke, thats why the logic of what a square actually is doesn't apply. Its like telling Diogenes that his chicken is not technically a human because it doesn't have two hands and a nose.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Diogenes plucked that chicken to point out Platon's definition of a human (being a bipedal, featherless animal) being flawed. This meme leaves out parts of the definition to enforce a joke. Two different situations.

[–] burgersc12@mander.xyz 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Its similar enough, the definition is limited and therefore enables a joke to be made.

[–] CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's not similar, it's the exact opposite.

[–] burgersc12@mander.xyz 0 points 1 day ago

It still demonstrated what I was trying to say, that if you go too literal on these two jokes then you're missing the point

[–] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

These are parallel too. They just look that way because they are project on to the euclidean plain.