I guess it’s all a matter of cultural conditioning but growing up in Scandinavia this kind of rhetoric was always associated with right-wingers and other liberals whereas “both sides” was more common for progressives and leftists. The most common I saw was the one-persons-terrorist-is-another-persons-freedom-fighter.
It’s always been complicated, Chomsky famously got criticized around the world for opposing censorship of different perspectives. Censorship has always come from collectivist ideologies though.
There’s 3 lights
The one on the left is a MAGA, they’re unable to listen to logic even if the answer is right in front of them.
I see seven
Are my eyes fucked up
look at the ends. probably you’re thinking of seven (7) stacked together
No those are 14
cover up the ends. the spaces between the lines are the tops of the blocks, except the bottom-most one, which is the side of a block.
It’s obviously nine you pan-arab zionist !
People take your joke so personally lol
I don’t know why there’s even a debate over that. The answer is clearly “Yanny.”
no, it’s blue and gold
I see the problem, the artist forgot the rest of the sentence:
“Four-sided objects, of which there are three.”
Boom. Done. EZPZ. Do better, artist.
Rectangular prisms have 6 sides though.
You discovered “political nuance”
0-based indexing vs. 1-based indexing
What? The first ordinal you start counting at doesn’t change the total count, and alternatively the last item would be indexed at 2 if you used 0-based indexing.
1-based indexing vs. 2-based indexing
Instructions unclear, I got my dick caught in the number 8.
Top or bottom?
Yes?
8 is a switch
New trolley problem dropped
Holy hell
'bout tree fiddy
Goddammit, Loch Ness Monster, I ain’t gonna give you no tree fiddy
I can’t see four. I’m sure it’s there, it just doesn’t appear to me.
Originally it was supposed to be an optical illusion that looks like three or four rods from different angles.
This edit has changed it to be just literally three. It’s a joke on certain people denying reality.
I think the joke is that there’s indeed unequivocally just three, and that one of them still says four despite that fact, contradicting the readers expectations who normally for this format expects the middle thing to be something that changes with perspective (eg. 6 vs 9)
Do you not see four? Your really missing out. I think some guys even started worshiping it. We even started selling a book about four. Once you see it, you can join out super cool club and four based economy.
THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS
Tea. Earl Grey. Hot.
Make it so.
Shut up, Wesley.
We should build a wall around four, and make three pay for for it
9
18
At least there are no centrists in here claiming it’s 3.5
Or that we should agree on “throur”
I fucking knew these comments would get political, they always do
Everything social is political, because politics are the mechanics of society. A non political conversation is impossible.
Welcome to Lemmy
I see 37
In a row??