this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
1194 points (100.0% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

30183 readers
5868 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 101 points 6 days ago (7 children)

what's wrong with this? 1994 is indeed the late 1900s, and it's 31 years ago so depending on the topic they're writing on, it could be immensely outdated

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 76 points 6 days ago (2 children)

...it's 31 years ago

fuck you. 1994 was 10 years ago, not 30.

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days ago (1 children)

TIL I'm only 13. Hellz yeah, skibidi doo dah skibidi day or whatever the kids say now. I'll ask my kid now that she's older than me.

[–] dick_fineman@discuss.online 3 points 6 days ago

I guess I'm 23 now...time for my first Existential Crisis again! Fun times! I should probably quit my job and start my own business, right?!

[–] stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 6 days ago

sorry my bad

[–] quack@lemmy.zip 64 points 6 days ago (1 children)

There is nothing wrong with it other than it makes me feel ancient and I don’t like it.

[–] stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 6 days ago

ok boomer

<3

[–] LarsIsCool@lemmy.world 59 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

To answer the question: The professor assumes the email referred to 1900-1910 with "late 1900s". As this was normal 20 years ago (and still gets used). He then gets upset realising the age difference between him and his student was likely the main contributor to this incorrect assumption.

To ask a question back: From https://www.bucknell.edu/fac-staff/john-penniman, I read:

John Penniman is Associate Professor and chair of Religious Studies

I would say for religious studies it should be fine. But also for other areas, why can't you use 1994 papers?

[–] InputZero@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It depends on what field you're studying. Some fields of study, like social studies, move very quickly. So it's not uncommon for someone studying one of those subjects to exclude research that's even 10 to 15 years old because things move so quickly.

A different subject, say hydrologic engineering has been studied for hundreds of years and doesn't change very quickly. So a publication from 1994 could be just as valid today as it was then. Every topic is different and without more context the meme as is, is just meant to incite a reaction. Not to tell us about something that actually happened.

[–] Gloomy@mander.xyz 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I study social study and frequently use papers that are referring to Karl Marx. Or feminist literature from the 70s. Or black literature from the 60s.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 6 days ago

Yeah, I'd sooner say the situation is reverse, social studies would move slower and less "definitively" than natural sciences. I'm into linguistics and literature and for me it's nothing unusual to use scholarship and materials all the way from the 19th century. Of course, when you're working with old literature or old language, you need old materials too... To me it's very interesting and important to know what Aristotle thought of Homer, while it's perfectly irrelevant for a doctor to know what Galen thought of the humours or for a chemist what Newton thought of alchemy.

[–] stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 6 days ago

I assumed they might be working in certain fields of science where the most progress is very recent so old papers will be very incomplete and sometimes even wrong.

My field is particle physics and while a paper from 1994 wouldn't be completely useless, I would need to check if recent papers still confirm the same results.

[–] FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org 16 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

It sounds weird, given that 1994 was like 30 years ago, not 130 years. I'd personally say "late 90s" rather than late 1900s. If i was referring to the 19th century, then yea I may say late 1800s for 1894. There isn't anything wrong with it, it just sounds weird and makes a lot of people feel old as shit. Most people would say late 90s I think. I feel that you'd get a weird look if you referred to 1994 as the late 1900s in casual conversation.

[–] zqps@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 days ago (2 children)

It's the late 20th century, or the 1990s.

I'd take "late 1900s" as 1906-1910.

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 days ago (2 children)

How would you refer to a time period between 1867 and 1892?

[–] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm the beginning of time ...

[–] zqps@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

The late 19th century?

[–] stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 days ago

fair enough

[–] yata@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 days ago

Very much depending on the topic. For specialised niche subjects, which are usually the ones students choose for final papers, literature can be very scarce, and 1994 would be fairly recent. For my specialised field the main study (which is still being cited frequently) is from 1870.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SpiceDealer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 50 points 6 days ago (3 children)

If this was a CS major, 1994 might as well be Antiquity

[–] uuldika@lemmy.ml 22 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I read CS papers from the late '80s/early '90s and it feels like unearthing cuneiform tablets. Lots of good ideas, just everything felt so raw and new.

[–] xavier666@lemm.ee 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I was just reading the first paper on TCP Vegas (TCP congestion avoidance protocol) and the tests were done with bandwidths of "over 100 Kbps" over the internet. Feels almost unreal.

[–] uuldika@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 days ago

and I was just looking at a 100Tbps backhaul the other day.. that's what, a billion times more bandwidth?

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

Because Signal surely isn't based on works from 80s, yes.

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

You guys remember when Sony made tiny handheld AM radios?

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 28 points 6 days ago

I'll just be over here checking into an assisted living home. Don't mind me.

[–] S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com 38 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Today in Warframe a new character dropped he is a rockstar. One guy from my clan asked me "Do you know who David Bowie is? He is kind of an old rock legend..." Bruh I'm 40 WTF?

[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 27 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Kids these days will be easy prey for the Goblin King.

[–] S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 days ago

They are just one brick in the wall....

[–] slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Nickelback is classic rock.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 5 points 6 days ago

My local classic rock station classifies "classic rock" as released >25 years ago. They play Green Day fairly regularly now

[–] Jayjader@jlai.lu 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

This one gets me, as when I learned of the concept of "classic rock", Nickelback's "How You Remind Me" had just came out and was playing non-stop on the "newest hits" radios.

[–] slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org 2 points 5 days ago

I used to be a huge motorhead fan. One day i bought the "new" album and didn't really like it. I still listend to the band, but less and less, and never bought a new album. To me, that is still the new album when i think about motorhead. That album is now 20 something years old.

[–] Broadfern@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Bowie died in 2016. Is your clan mate like 14?

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago

Four years ago, got it.

[–] S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 6 days ago

He got to 15 this year...

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Is the final paper on the events of the early 1900's? I feel like we need a bit more context...

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago
load more comments