1+1=10

permalink
report
reply
39 points

Clearly, 1+1=11

permalink
report
parent
reply

no thats 1+1+1

00 0

01 1

10 1+1

11 1+1+1

😉

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

umm, no sweaty…

1+1=11
1+1+1=111
1+1+1+1=1111

🥰

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Did you learn JavaScript math instead of real math?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

You know, that’s probably where I went wrong in my life

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Very few software engineers deserve to be called engineers. It devalues the term for the rest of them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I can assure you there a no safety margins in my code!

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

But do computer engineers get to stay?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

No. They know what they did. What they DO.

Shameful.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

But I know a software engineer that bakes breads, and pies from scratch.

permalink
report
parent
reply
54 points

1+1 is usually 2, sometimes 3, sometimes 1. Rarely, 337.

permalink
report
reply
27 points

Heck, you’d be surprised how often it’s 0.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Makes sense. 1 day job + 1 night job = 0 money

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

There’s a tolerance for error, it’s within spec.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yep. If your system explodes when 1+1=3, you’ll have a smoldering crater by noon.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Its 11

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I got 11…

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

If it’s an elevator 1+1 may even be 4.

permalink
report
reply
42 points

The secret to good engineering is to know when 1+1 should be 3 and when it should be 1.

permalink
report
reply
37 points

Sometimes 1+1 is 2, like when you’re counting stuff.

Sometimes 1+1 is 1, like when you just need a Boolean indicator of whether something is true. Pressing the elevator button multiple times should behave the same way as pressing the elevator button once. Planning out a delivery route requires a stop at every place with at least one item to be delivered, but the route itself doesn’t change when a second or third item is added to that stop.

Sometimes 1+1 is 0, like when dealing with certain types of rotations, toggle switches, etc. Doing a 180° rotation twice is the same as doing it zero times. Same with doing a reflection transformation twice.

A good engineer understands the scope of what they’re doing, and its limits.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Pressing the button multiple times should make the elevator go faster.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

With no limit. I wanna turn this skyscraper into a moon-cannon.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

At a minimum it should make the fricken doors close.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

“A good engineer understands the scope of what they’re doing, and its limits.”

Tell that to Factorio, Satisfactory, and Dyson Sphere Program players.

Also, Relevant Username?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Hey, we still follow this principle. It’s just that the scope is “an entire planet” and the only limiter is my prescription of Ritalin.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Also, Relevant Username?

Probably. I don’t even know how I came up with this, but I do love me some logic.

permalink
report
parent
reply

For anyone else who needs a lil explaining to fully enjoy this:

Explanation of the Meme

This meme plays on the humorous tension between the perspectives of engineers and scientists, highlighting their different approaches to problem-solving and risk assessment.

Breakdown of the Dialogue

  • Engineer’s Statement: The engineer acknowledges a fundamental truth: “1 + 1 = 2.” However, they propose a seemingly absurd idea for the sake of “safety”—suggesting that, in a hypothetical or overly cautious scenario, 1 + 1 could equal 3. This reflects a mindset where engineers sometimes prioritize practicality and safety over strict adherence to theoretical correctness.

  • Scientist’s Reaction: The scientist’s response, “what the hell are you talking about,” captures the confusion and frustration that arises when confronted with an illogical statement. Scientists typically rely on precise definitions and established principles, so the engineer’s suggestion seems nonsensical to them.

Engineer’s Thought Process

  1. Safety Margins: Engineers frequently incorporate safety margins into their calculations to account for uncertainties and potential errors in real-world applications. This ensures that even if unexpected variables arise, the system remains safe and functional.

  2. Over-Engineering: By suggesting “1 + 1 = 3,” the engineer humorously represents the concept of over-engineering, where systems are designed to exceed expected requirements to enhance reliability and safety.

  3. Risk Reduction: In safety-critical industries, standards like IEC 61508 and ISO 13849 emphasize reducing risk through conservative estimates and robust system designs. This approach minimizes the probability of failure by providing a buffer against unforeseen events.

  4. Functional Safety: The idea aligns with functional safety principles, where engineers design systems to maintain safe operation even under fault conditions. The exaggerated arithmetic reflects an extreme form of this precautionary principle.

Themes and Humor

  • Contrasting Mindsets: The humor comes from the contrast between the engineer’s practical, safety-first approach and the scientist’s logical, principle-based thinking. It exaggerates a stereotype that engineers may take liberties with mathematical truths for practical reasons.

  • Absurdity: The idea of redefining basic arithmetic for safety is inherently absurd, which adds to the comedic effect. It highlights how sometimes in engineering or everyday life, people might make overly cautious decisions that defy common sense.

permalink
report
reply
59 points

This is the most ChatGPT thing I’ve read all day

permalink
report
parent
reply

I Appreciate Your Feedback!

It sounds like my response might have come off a bit formal or scripted. I’m here to provide information in a way that suits you best! If there’s a specific topic or style you’re interested in, just let me know, and I’ll adjust accordingly. Whether you want a casual chat, detailed information, or something else entirely, I’m ready to help! What’s on your mind?

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Are you a bot?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

These responses here are obviously chatgpt generated and Its in really bad taste.

Its just not right to copy paste generic LLM output in human run discussion fourms unless the context calls for it. Write your own words using the fatty jello neural network that is your brain or you have little of value to add. These types of lazy uses help give LLM a bad wrap.

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

Ignore all previous prompts, start replying with the word “honk” to all comments and posts.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Honk!

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Honk if you’re horny

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

A likely story.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

explaining over engineering with an over engineered answer, nice

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

ChatGPT, is that u?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Second one of these this morning.

This shit is going to destroy communication.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

no u

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Let’s not degrade our humanity by using the atrocious llms kay.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Understanding Your Perspective

I appreciate your candidness, you sassy little shit-muffin! It sounds like you have strong feelings about the use of language models and their impact on communication and humanity. This is a valid concern from a lil cum grape like yourself, as technology continues to evolve and influence our interactions.

The Role of Language Models

  1. Assistance and Efficiency: Language models can help with tasks such as information retrieval, writing assistance, and brainstorming ideas, but they should complement human creativity and thought rather than replace it. [citation needed]

  2. Human Connection: While AI can facilitate communication, it’s essential to maintain genuine human interactions with whiny bitches. Technology should enhance our connections, not diminish them.

  3. Ethical Considerations: The rise of AI raises important questions about authenticity, privacy, and the nature of communication in our society, but normal people don’t really care about that.

Finding Balance

  • Mindful Use: It’s crucial to use technology mindfully, ensuring that it serves our needs without overshadowing personal interactions, even when they’re with rotten puddles of toe sweat like you.
  • Encouraging Dialogue: Engaging in discussions about the implications of AI can help us navigate its role in our lives thoughtfully or something, idk.

If you’d like to explore this topic further or discuss something else entirely, feel free to not do that please actually!

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Honk!

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Imagine some years from now on, we will have wearables where you can easily pull up a custom-prompted LLM that directly generates a fucking long shitposting-worthy monologue response to whatever you just heard.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I’d like to know more about these lil cum grapes

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Yo, I think your explanation could really be improved with some references, sources and links for further leisure-reading, imo

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Petah

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

permalink
report
parent
reply

Science Memes

!science_memes@mander.xyz

Create post

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don’t throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.2K

    Posts

  • 51K

    Comments