I think they mean Delta V or the potential change in velocity. So it’s saying that a lesbian relationship has the highest potential to travel the furthest.
From that, I can extrapolate that lesbian relationships are the future of space travel and all future astronauts will be in lesbian relationships.
Do they have a solution for the raspberry jam problem?
(Tried to find a link for the term in case someone thinks it’s a sexist joke or something, but seems to be surprisingly hard. So I’ll just briefly explain that raspberry jam delta v is the acceleration or deceleration rate where the contents of a passenger compartment start to resemble said substance.)
Ooh! Since we’re straying so far off topic, I’d like to share a similarly gross story I don’t often get to tell.
Back in the oelden days, I was in the Army and was volunteered to test a replacement for the Tow anti-tank missile. The system I was assigned to evaluate - with a squad of my peers - was the Swedish Bill. They wouldn’t tell us much about how it worked, but we did know that the missile would detect when it was over a tank at an optimum angle and explode a shaped charge, driving a round (we suspected it was depleted uranium or tungsten) down into the tank. The round was shot with sufficient force to pass through armor (of the day) and out the bottom of the tank. The round was followed by plasma, and what we were told was this: that the effectiveness wasn’t that it would blow up the tank, per se - unless it happened to ignite ammunition in the tank - but that the round went so fast that it created a vacuum inside the tank, sucking any soft material that happened to be in the tank out through the 10cm exit hole. So it created high Delta-P conditions in the tank.
When, decades later, the Delta-P crab video made the rounds, it reminded me of that trial.
It wasn’t 1atm of pressure. The round passing through the (enclosed) compartment of the target at high velocity created a vacuum that sucked any soft material out after it. There was also the explosion that happened on the armor, and some sort of plasma that went in after the round that all probably contributed to the effect.
I don’t know the technical details, and as I said, they were pretty proprietary with exactly how the thing worked; I was just a grunt assigned to carry out around and fire it. We had some Swedish military guys training us and consulting on the trials, and that’s what they told us the effects were. I assume they’d tested the thing with pigs or something; I don’t know if it was designed that way or just a happy side-effect.
What I remember most is that it was like playing a video game, and that it really fucked up tanks. We got to look at the results, and while our targets didn’t have any animals in them, it did seem to incinerate anything that wasn’t bolted down and spray it on the ground under the target.
The wiki article is equally tight-lipped about the exact mechanism of action. I just know it was different from a TOW in that the damage wasn’t from a warhead exploding against armor; it was firing a projectile via a shaped charge as it passed over the target. There was much more debris left of the missile than we found from TOWs, although it was still a pretty destructive process for the missile.
Algospeak. The voluntary censoring of your own language to satisfy the advertising requirements of corporations who want to monetize your thoughts.
While I do understand the need for language guidelines on platforms, the nearly instant training of TikTok users to avoid or substitute brand-unfriendly language is disgusting.
edit to add: DV has been a common abbreviation for the term long before social media algorithms were in the public eye source (Google ngrams)
i know people add it to their filters and blocks as a potentially triggering topic. more relevant on mastodon with their custom content warning messages but there are definitely more reasons to do this than “algospeak.” also prevalent on tumblr a la “CW: DV, SA,” which again can be filtered out per user. hopefully this can make u a little less disgusted :)
esit 2: this comment is not a defense of this behavior? i have had to repeat several times in this discussion that i am not defending the action, just providing a parallel narrative that i happen to know a bit about. knowing why people do a thing doesn’t make me an advocate for that behavior, it just makes me someone who paid attention lol
Pretty sure that makes it harder to filter things out if you use abbreviations for normal words. And this isn’t Tumbler. If the mention of these topics in a title is too much for you then you should seek more therapy immediately
also people that do this are almost certainly healing in therapy and their therapists probably encourage being mindful of the content they consume so your snarky edit falls a little tasteless.
again i am not expressing my own experience but just how i have seen others interact with their platforms and how that habbit may have spread to reddit which was then reposted by a bot here. i am not even defending them, just saying what i have seen. but this platform is so toxic it devolves into homophobic comments (not from you) and unkind mental health snark (from you) even as i am trying to express a parallel explanation as politely as possible.
My issue with it is that it ONLY serves to satisfy corporate goals, it doesn’t actually prevent people from being exposed to ideas or topics that might be distressing or disturbing to some users. It’s sucking corporate cock and being proud of it.
i… did you read my comment? it was a very polite one and it explains specifically how it is a user created standard that serves to allow users to have control of their browsing experience.
i don’t appreciate your homophobic description of something like putting “CW SA” so that people can enjoy the internet as much as possible as “sucking corporate cock.” be fucking nice.
Using abbreviations or initialisms obscures the meaning from people who are not in the know but does nothing to prevent people who might not want to think about the topic from being exposed to the idea, the code IS the idea. Not using coded language maintains clarity, does not bow down to corporate interest and is just as easily caught by filters for people who do not wish to be exposed to those topics.
good okay this is the comment you should have made in the first place. yes i agree uncoded language might be better, while some might disagree and say that fully spelling it out can be more triggering. i don’t have strong opinions either way but i thank you for actually engaging with the topic this time instead of throwing around gross sexual attacks for no constructive reason.
What do you do with all the time you save making titles useless?
I think they mean Delta V or the potential change in velocity. So it’s saying that a lesbian relationship has the highest potential to travel the furthest.
From that, I can extrapolate that lesbian relationships are the future of space travel and all future astronauts will be in lesbian relationships.
I heard NASA has been investigating lesbian relationship power as the source for their next heavy lifter, because of the high DV.
Do they have a solution for the raspberry jam problem?
(Tried to find a link for the term in case someone thinks it’s a sexist joke or something, but seems to be surprisingly hard. So I’ll just briefly explain that raspberry jam delta v is the acceleration or deceleration rate where the contents of a passenger compartment start to resemble said substance.)
Ooh! Since we’re straying so far off topic, I’d like to share a similarly gross story I don’t often get to tell.
Back in the oelden days, I was in the Army and was volunteered to test a replacement for the Tow anti-tank missile. The system I was assigned to evaluate - with a squad of my peers - was the Swedish Bill. They wouldn’t tell us much about how it worked, but we did know that the missile would detect when it was over a tank at an optimum angle and explode a shaped charge, driving a round (we suspected it was depleted uranium or tungsten) down into the tank. The round was shot with sufficient force to pass through armor (of the day) and out the bottom of the tank. The round was followed by plasma, and what we were told was this: that the effectiveness wasn’t that it would blow up the tank, per se - unless it happened to ignite ammunition in the tank - but that the round went so fast that it created a vacuum inside the tank, sucking any soft material that happened to be in the tank out through the 10cm exit hole. So it created high Delta-P conditions in the tank.
When, decades later, the Delta-P crab video made the rounds, it reminded me of that trial.
Delta-V to Delta-P; how’s that for a seque?
Pretty gruesome.
Well, you started it, Mr Raspberry Jam… or should I say Prince Jamroll??
Without knowing anything about weaponry, it seems sketchy to claim that a 1atm pressure difference would do that.
It wasn’t 1atm of pressure. The round passing through the (enclosed) compartment of the target at high velocity created a vacuum that sucked any soft material out after it. There was also the explosion that happened on the armor, and some sort of plasma that went in after the round that all probably contributed to the effect.
I don’t know the technical details, and as I said, they were pretty proprietary with exactly how the thing worked; I was just a grunt assigned to carry out around and fire it. We had some Swedish military guys training us and consulting on the trials, and that’s what they told us the effects were. I assume they’d tested the thing with pigs or something; I don’t know if it was designed that way or just a happy side-effect.
What I remember most is that it was like playing a video game, and that it really fucked up tanks. We got to look at the results, and while our targets didn’t have any animals in them, it did seem to incinerate anything that wasn’t bolted down and spray it on the ground under the target.
The wiki article is equally tight-lipped about the exact mechanism of action. I just know it was different from a TOW in that the damage wasn’t from a warhead exploding against armor; it was firing a projectile via a shaped charge as it passed over the target. There was much more debris left of the missile than we found from TOWs, although it was still a pretty destructive process for the missile.
Crazy. I believe it. Maybe it’s some combination of overpressure and sudden vacuum. Love your description, thanks for the effort.
I’m in lesbian with this.
it’s the seventh most common use case of course
unless there’s an actual reason to leave “domestic violence” out of a Lemmy post. I assume it’s a bad habit learned from corpo social media
those aren’t sorted by frequency, also see this comment
that gives me an http error
weird, sorry works for me. well you found it anyway and responded so all’s well that ends well
I opt for “deo volente” (god willing)
Algospeak. The voluntary censoring of your own language to satisfy the advertising requirements of corporations who want to monetize your thoughts.
While I do understand the need for language guidelines on platforms, the nearly instant training of TikTok users to avoid or substitute brand-unfriendly language is disgusting.
edit to add: DV has been a common abbreviation for the term long before social media algorithms were in the public eye source (Google ngrams)
i know people add it to their filters and blocks as a potentially triggering topic. more relevant on mastodon with their custom content warning messages but there are definitely more reasons to do this than “algospeak.” also prevalent on tumblr a la “CW: DV, SA,” which again can be filtered out per user. hopefully this can make u a little less disgusted :)
esit 2: this comment is not a defense of this behavior? i have had to repeat several times in this discussion that i am not defending the action, just providing a parallel narrative that i happen to know a bit about. knowing why people do a thing doesn’t make me an advocate for that behavior, it just makes me someone who paid attention lol
Pretty sure that makes it harder to filter things out if you use abbreviations for normal words. And this isn’t Tumbler. If the mention of these topics in a title is too much for you then you should seek more therapy immediately
also people that do this are almost certainly healing in therapy and their therapists probably encourage being mindful of the content they consume so your snarky edit falls a little tasteless.
again i am not expressing my own experience but just how i have seen others interact with their platforms and how that habbit may have spread to reddit which was then reposted by a bot here. i am not even defending them, just saying what i have seen. but this platform is so toxic it devolves into homophobic comments (not from you) and unkind mental health snark (from you) even as i am trying to express a parallel explanation as politely as possible.
well it works for some people. not saying it’s the perfect system, just giving an explanation that fits alongside the one the other person gave 👍
My issue with it is that it ONLY serves to satisfy corporate goals, it doesn’t actually prevent people from being exposed to ideas or topics that might be distressing or disturbing to some users. It’s sucking corporate cock and being proud of it.
i… did you read my comment? it was a very polite one and it explains specifically how it is a user created standard that serves to allow users to have control of their browsing experience.
i don’t appreciate your homophobic description of something like putting “CW SA” so that people can enjoy the internet as much as possible as “sucking corporate cock.” be fucking nice.
Using abbreviations or initialisms obscures the meaning from people who are not in the know but does nothing to prevent people who might not want to think about the topic from being exposed to the idea, the code IS the idea. Not using coded language maintains clarity, does not bow down to corporate interest and is just as easily caught by filters for people who do not wish to be exposed to those topics.
good okay this is the comment you should have made in the first place. yes i agree uncoded language might be better, while some might disagree and say that fully spelling it out can be more triggering. i don’t have strong opinions either way but i thank you for actually engaging with the topic this time instead of throwing around gross sexual attacks for no constructive reason.
Not common enough that I had heard the abbreviation before. (And I’m older than social media and the internet itself)
Maybe it’s common among people involved in the topic, but I’d bet the wider population doesn’t know what it means without some added context.
I also don’t know what any of those 3 are intended to mean (without further context).
Excessive brevity destroys clarity.
fully agree, again just providing a parallel narrative to explain why people do this
what you are seeing is probably a combination of a) algospeak and b) a niche behavior being applied to the general internet and causing confusion