The worst part of this quote is that, in the original, she (Marilyn Monroe) actually framed her "worst":
>I'm selfish, impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best.
So in the context it sounds more like "here are my flaws - take me or leave me, but you won't change me". Which sounds reasonable. But without that context it sounds more like "I'm entitled because I like to pretend that I'm above other people".
It depends, at their worst are they abusive to their friends, family etc for no good reason? If so, then I'd agree it is nonsense used by abusers. If it's said by someone who gets treated awfully for having a rough day, week etc and gets treated badly, well then this quote is true.
I feel like I've never seen or heard of anyone good using that quote. I'm sure it makes some sense if used in genuine good faith. The quote would make sense applied to someone with a disability, for example, by interpreting it more along the lines of having to deal with the person not always being outgoing and maybe even sometimes needing extra help.
But no, I've only ever seen shitty (or at least allegedly shitty) people use that quote, to justify their shittiness. The "worst" they refer to is usually bouts of anger or abuse.
This again is a misnomer because, not just because you stop looking… but because people find it hard to admit things are lost. All part of the half serious, half ridiculous psuedo science of Findology (disclaimer: my own blog)
Embarrassingly it took me years to realize what that quote meant. I had always interpreted it to mean that the item is found in an unexpected place.
But of course what it really means is that you stop looking once the item is found, therefore that's the last place you looked 🤦
This reminds me of the "you eat X amount of spiders in your sleep every year".
It's also been debunked so many times and I see it popping up from time to time.
Even more ironic, this was created by some professor (?) to prove that starting fake viral facts was easy or something...
If you just add the words on average, suddenly it sounds more realistic, because who knows if there's a guy somewhere sleepwalking in a spider infested place
I've almost never heard anyone quote that, but I've heard numerous people arguing against that statement. So much that I'm wondering it it has mandela-affected people to think it's a more common misconception than it really is.
One thing I never understood about that nonsense quote is why it would be a bad thing even if it were true. Like, who the heck wants people to be "hard" or have hard times? What's so awful about people having easy times and getting to relax and enjoy life?
It's also usually used by "back in my day" bigots who are usually using it to complain about people they don't like and quite frequently LGBT people, because they think that their generation pushing people into the closet was somehow a good thing (or that it meant LGBT people didn't exist).
"Life's not fair." It seems that more often than not the person saying it is in a position to make the situation fair. Usually it is people in positions of power saying it and it feels more like an excuse for their inaction.
…often said with the unspoken implication that it’s a good reason, planned by a higher power, and that you should just meekly accept things and shut up.
Everything happens as the result of an infinite number of things that happened beforehand and led inevitably to this thing happening now. Free will is a lie.
Super closely related is the "god works in mysterious ways" apology often used as the response if you ask what that reason was. It's bizarre that the people saying that quote are so insistent that everything happens for a reason even though they cannot answer what that reason might be (and usually get really uncomfortable if you press for an answer).
I feel like that quote is better interpreted as "you haven't failed until/unless you give up." There is also value to "don't go into something without committing to it," but damn not everything has to be a fucking job.
Let's not let those people "have" Star Wars quotes. Same thing when Nazi trash in America tried to co-opt the "Ok" hand sign, Hawaiian shirts, etc. I was a bit dismayed by how fast people were willing to cede those things away. My take is: They can't have them, don't give up so easily.
"Equal rights means equal lefts" or whatever tf it was, especially during the Depp/Heard thing. Basically condoning hitting women. But then if you disagree with it, it gets spun into endorsing women abusing men. Reddit comments can be fucking gross.
I mean I get that if used in a context where a person does something with great risk attached and with few and rare good possible outcomes (stupid games). And then they get a bad outcome (stupid prize).
Anything on a decorative sign meant to hang in a house. Examples include “Live, Laugh, Love” (which has already been mentioned) or something about wine.
The friggin "definition of insanity" quote that is usually misattributed to Einstein. From some cursory research, a lot of first appearances of the quote come from the 80s, though I saw a few different sources from Narcotics Anonymous pamphlets to mystery novels.
Jokes aside though, misattributed quotes are quite the phenomenon. Is it deliberate? Is it some sort of mandela effect? It's really weird sometimes, but like Gandhi said, don't believe anything that comes without a verifiable source.
Ehhhh, I want to agree but practice is expecting the same result, minor incremental improvement. In scientific experimentation, one should not be expecting anything, that's researcher bias.
Even in grade school I knew this was hogwash. I didn't act the same in class as during recess, or in church as when at the dinner table. Exactly which me was I supposed to be? When someone asks, "What am I supposed to do?" They are really asking, "How should I behave?" And if you've never been on a date before, or this is your first job interview, then it's not obvious.
A: "So, how did the interview go?"
B: "Not so well, he threw my resume away, in front of me, and ordered me to leave."
A: "What? Why?"
B: "Well, I did just as your said, I was being myself. I walked in, gave him the ol' finger guns, then started with my best fart joke."
A: "Why the hell would you do that at an interview?"
B: "Because that routine always slays in the dorms and I was trying to be myself."
Agreed. This sounds good but immediately falls apart at the first scrutiny. It's the same with "Don't be a dick." Everyone nods their heads and thinks, "Oh, that's so obvious!" Of course, everyone agrees because they're imagining what they believe is 'evil' or 'being a dick' and just assume everyone else agrees. Imagine their surprised-Pikachu face when they learn that other humans use different criteria.
But, if you think you can sum up thousands of years of ethics and legal theories with one pithy sentence, then go for it.
For me its the one that promoted me to write this, the futurama quote "you're are technically correct, the best kind of correct"
I hate how people use it over at forums, it is repeated ad nauseam, even if it doesn't make much sense. It's probably from people using it constantly that I hate the quote, and not something that has to do with the meaning.
It's weird that it's still used unironically today (and in fact feels like it's made a relatively recent revival). Like, you'd think they'd at least switch to a phrase that makes sense.
What you guys are referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux. Thank you for taking your time to cooperate with with me, your friendly GNU+Linux neighbor, Richard Stallman.
The quote attributed to Stallman is made up and is a distortion of his actual views.
He created GNU as an operating system. His position is that when talking about the GNU OS, it is appropriate to call it GNU/linux if it’s running the linux kernel, though he is also fine with calling it GNU.
Especially virusses and bacteria: Your immune system gets a bit stronger but organs probably have small irreversable damages because there is scartissue where the infection was the worst.
I don't think that's the original quote, but rather came later to try and improve the clearly flawed quote. Searching, I found https://grammarist.com/phrase/the-customer-is-always-right/, which says the original quote is the rather uninspiring "Rule number one: the customer is always right. Rule number two: If the customer is wrong, please refer to rule number one".
That said, I do agree with you completely. I think the quote is just so obviously flawed, as customers abuse the heck out of it. Treating it as applying to aggregates makes way more sense. e.g., if customers want a pink doodad and you only sell doodads in black... well, then you're wrong and should start selling them in pink.
As a corollary, I also like the quote that has been often attributed to Ford (but checking, it seems unproven if he actually said it), "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." I like that quote because customers often frankly don't actually know what they want. I've had countless times myself where I didn't know I wanted a product until after I learned about it. And myself, I'm a software dev. This quote constantly applies to my field. The idea of users not knowing what they want is an extremely popular meme in the field (example). Users often need expert guidance to identify what they actually want and what a practical solution might look like.
This is from Darwin, I think. It describes the mechanism of selection in evolution: the organisms that are better adapted to their environments are the ones more likely to survive.
Bady likely hates it because it's often misused, by transforming it in a prescriptive statement (from "the fittest survives" to "the fittest deserves to survive) and/or ignoring that what's considered the fittest depends on the environment (e.g. a fish isn't fit in a dry environment, but a cactus isn't fit in the sea).
It also doesn’t apply when the whole point of the name was to be a spoof on the peanut butter. It even has a saying to go along with it so that more people would adopt it. “Choosy developers choose gif”. People can say they don’t care what the original creator intended, because words are malleable, but what other word on the planet comes with an actual pronunciation guide along with it to sell the word!
I wondered about this for years and years, never understanding, especially, since "having cake" and "eating cake" are used interchangeably. But, I finally figured it out! In this sense, the "having" is equivalent to "keeping" or "being in possession of."
Examples:
"What's it like having a Mercedes Benz?"
"The Smiths have a very nice home."
No eating implied!
Therefore, the saying is more inline with "You can't keep (to show off or admire) your cake, and eat it, too."
One time I baked a whole entire cake for myself. There was no occasion or anything I just wanted to have a cake and eat it too. It turns out cakes are really big and it's really hard for a single person to eat a cake faster than it turns all spongy and icky.
Both my two-time-car-crash-survivor self with severe PTSD and my breast-cancer-surviving mom (who had to get her boobs chopped off) fucking hate that phrase with a passion. There are some times I have to walk across an intersection and just start crying right there because I'm so terrified. I want to kick the nuts off of whoever came up with that phrase.
"It is what it is." It's such a meaningless truism* and almost always comes across as dismissive of the person you're speaking to. Just say, "It sucks but we have to get through it," or "We can't change this situation" or something else. Literally any alternative. Please!