Bonus points if it’s usually misused/misunderstood by the people who say it

    • Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I thought that was the joke: I could care less… but I can’t even be bothered to care any less because I care so little.

      • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        It’s just people saying it wrong, like “bone apple tea” instead of " bon appetit". It’s supposed to be “I couldn’t care less”. But I mean come on, these are the same people who searched for “Michael Jackson Billy’s Jeans” so often on YouTube that it became a recommended search term. Lol.

    • dreadgoat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I actually love this one, because it’s technically correct but not in the way people who use it mean, so you can turn it around easily.

      Yes, you did get cancer for a reason. Because you insisted on maintaining your suntan every winter. Or perhaps merely because you pissed off the wrong banana.

      • baggachipz@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        In my case, it was through no action of my own and merely bad luck. So the only “reason” would be bad luck or a shitty all-powerful deity.

        • dreadgoat@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          That’s the malicious banana. Everything happens for a reason, but that doesn’t mean it’s reasonable

  • Donebrach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    “They’re just one bad apple” in reference to (more often than not) shitty cops, but also for most malcontents in a position of public trust. This a misappropriation of the aphorism “one bad apple spoils the bunch” which is literally saying that if there’s one bad actor in a group, the entire group is comprised.

  • juiceclaws@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    9 months ago

    “Customer is always right” isn’t a trump card for customers to win disputes with the staff. When it comes to matters of preference, yes, the customer is always right. Ketchup on ice cream? Great. Down jacket and shorts? Sure thing! If it makes you happy and you’re paying for it then you’re always right.

    In most other matters though, customers are usually wrong. The idea that random people off the street know more about the products and the way a business should be run than the actual people selling said products and running said business is absolutely ridiculous.

    • jivemasta@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think the original quote was something along the lines of, “the customer is always right, in mattera of taste”. Meaning to accommodate the customers wishes, even if it’s ugly or a bad idea or whatever. Like if they want to paint their house pink with green trim, let them

      • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        I think it’s even broader than that.

        If customers want green socks, sell green socks.

        It would be have been better said as demand is always right (not supply).

  • GladiusB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    “if you can’t handle me at my worst you don’t deserve me at my best”.

    You’re basically excusing bad behavior. And never taking accountability. People are wrong. Mostly when they are so blindly following some perception of greatness rather than caring for those around you.

    • Susaga@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      Anyone who feels the need to say this is usually really, really bad at their worst, and just okay-ish at their best. They just need a reason why it’s everyone else’s fault nobody can put up with them.

  • jmsy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

    That is not the definition of insanity

    • blady_blah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah, isn’t it like practicing? You’re not very good at something so you practice over and over and over and hopefully when you’re done you do it better… You know different than when you started.

    • leaky_shower_thought@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      this quote works very well on computers who run instructions pretty consistent.

      any larger/ life-level scope and it falls apart from niche cases.

      • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Any software engineer you care to ask will tell you about situations in which doing the same thing has led to vastly different results.

      • Zacryon@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        *on deterministic computers.

        Technically, even then doing the same can lead to different results, if nondeterministic events play a role and the different aspects of the software or system may contain bugs. For example mutlithreaded applications where the scheduler can passively influence the outcome of an operation. In one run it fails, in another it doesn’t. A nightmare to debug.

    • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think you’re misunderstanding it. Do what you do, you’re going to break something anyways just don’t half-ass it. Just like there’s a graveyard behind every doctor, there’s a pile of mistakes behind every sysadmin.

      • Gerula@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        No, it’s not about caring or not about the consequences.

        The ideea is to do something, anything with full commitment, do it as you know you’re going to be successful. This way you give 100% and you have the best chances to succeed.

        If you just try something then from the start your mentally taking in consideration the possibility of failure and you’re preparing for that scenario and searching for the signs of it, which means you’re not 100% invested in the success of the task itself so the chances of success are smaller.

          • Gerula@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I think you’re referring to generalisations in the sense of cognitive distortions, but this is not the case. The saying merely calls for one to be completely dedicated to whatever task he undertakes in order to maximize his chances of success. Having doubts and starting to hatch a plan B actually takes resources (mental or emotional) from realisation of the actual task.

            When you say: I’ll try to … you’re actually stating your doubts about you capability to successfully do whatever task from the beginning. So you’ve already defined what failure is and what to do in that case. But you haven’t even begin the task and the journey that comes with the realisation of it. You haven’t even reach the first difficulties, the first hurdles.

            I hope you know that The Sith is a fictional construct :)

  • skozzii@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Whenever “woke” is brought up.

    Please give me your definition of woke, because so far it’s been different for everyone I’ve talked to.

      • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        That’s what it should mean, but it usually implies political awareness specifically and has been hijacked by several minority groups and their allies to imply that they are wholly in support of whatever the latest minority issue is.

        You haven’t heard of lgbtbbqx+? I have because I’m woke!

        • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          It was originally used by African American groups to describe white allies at the beginning of the last century.

          It’s evolved to describe any out group that’s aware of an in group’s problems.

          It’s been contorted be this decade’s scare word that conservative media uses.

    • Xariphon@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      9 months ago

      Especially when you consider that it was coined to refer to literally impossible action. It’s not meant to be about self-reliance or whatever, it’s something that cannot be done.

      • Mishmash2000@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        9 months ago

        THIS! A million times this!! It’s literally implying the opposite of their intent in that you have to have someone else HELP YOU because you OBVIOUSLY can’t pull yourself up by your own bootstraps!

        One way to use this phrase correctly would be “No one can pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, we all need some help along the way.”!

  • Fogle@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. And as far as I can tell Einstein never said it but it’s always attributed to Einstein

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      If I just rolled a 6 I’m not going to expect the same result if I roll the die again.

      • flying_gel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I would argue that you didn’t roll the die the exact same way…

        Of course there could be other things other than your movements like wind that also affects the outcome.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Right, so even if I’m doing the same thing I’m not doing it in the exact same way, so the result may be different.

    • aidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Well to a lot of people democratic rule isn’t their primary goal, that’s why they emphasize it.

    • Rob Bos@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Well technically, we’re a constitutional monarchy with the King of Canada as our nominal head of state. Gosh. Though I wouldn’t mind opening that discussion.

      • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        …constitutional monarchy with the *rightful heir of Emperor Joshua Norton as our nominal head of state.

        Fixed that for you, prepared to go to war over it