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

    • Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year 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
        ·
        1 year 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.

    • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      67
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or worse: “it’s all part of God’s plan!” every time something bad happens. “So… God’s a sadist, or what? Cuz his plan is shit.”

      • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        1 year ago

        God did ruin Job’s life over a bet with Satan so maybe this is less of a plan and more of a downward spiral gambling addiction

      • TechyDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or the related one: “I’d like to thank God for coming through this surgery.”

        What about the doctors, nurses, and various other staff members?

        • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          As a surgical tech, I have to bite my tongue when this pops up. Like… bitch, your god sent you to the OR in the first place - you should be pissed!

          • AnIntenseMoist@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hear me out on this: God is creating jobs for the community. If there weren’t stupid people around to get hurt, the smart ones wouldn’t have anything to do!

      • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I hate this phrase so, so much. Sometimes babies die within days of being born with no chance of getting baptized. Don’t people realize that the implication of this is that God is dooming them to purgatory just to spite the parents? Do they not Pealize how fucked up that sounds?

      • EnchiladaHole@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        or when someone gets the benefit of excellent medical care and thanks God for it. ugh. A lifetime of dedication by the doctors and scientists that brought you this cure? A distant second place.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or he sucks so bad at planning that he can’t make people happy without also hurting others.

        “But happiness would be meaningless without sadness to compare it to!”

        Bitch were you never happy before you learned what cancer was? Did you start enjoying life the moment you figured out what rape is? “Boy I sure am glad I’m not being raped today! Much happier than I would be if I didn’t know there was an alternative!”

    • dreadgoat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year 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
        5
        ·
        1 year 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.

  • Donebrach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year 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
    59
    ·
    1 year 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
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year 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
        5
        ·
        1 year 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
    58
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year 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
      ·
      1 year 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.

  • TheInsane42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Survival of the fittest” when used to indicate the stongest should survive. Instead of the one best suited for (fitting) the situation.

  • jmsy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year 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
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year 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
      ·
      1 year 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
        5
        ·
        1 year 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
        1 year 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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year 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
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year 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
            ·
            1 year 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 :)

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    “Agree to disagree.” No, dipshit, you’re just wrong.

    I do not agree to disagree, because we’re not arguing about opinions. Your belief is simply, objectively incorrect. Or mine is, which is something that I would be willing to accept. If I were wrong, you’d be able to convince me that I’m wrong. We can keep going until one of us accepts that we didn’t have an accurate understanding of reality.

    It’s always the dipshits that fall back on “Well, we will have to agree to disagree,” usually right after they’ve been presented with enough evidence to change the mind of a rational person. Fuck that, I do not agree to disagree.

      • Mog_fanatic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have found that the issue is often that people tend to not realize they’re arguing that 2+2=6, they think they’re arguing what ice cream flavor is the best

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is exactly the sort of argument that I was thinking of when I wrote the comment. We can agree to disagree on the best ice cream flavor, because everyone has different tastes. We cannot agree to disagree on whether the earth is flat, because it’s not and we have overwhelming proof that it isn’t.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If I were wrong, you’d be able to convince me that I’m wrong. We can keep going until one of us accepts that we didn’t have an accurate understanding of reality.

      I had an ex like you.

    • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      You don’t get tired of arguments? I see it as a ‘fine, be stupid if you want’ because I’m not spending more time on the point.

        • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Agreeing to disagree is just more polite and often nicer for both, if such agreement is reached. You’re basically saying that we can’t really convince each other of our position so let’s just leave it at that instead of trying endlessly.

          • CarlsIII@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I just don’t like the phrasing because “agreeing to disagree” makes it seem like you are accepting that it’s good that they don’t agree with you. Saying literally anything else to convey what just said would make more sense.

          • CarlsIII@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why do people keep acting like there’s nothing between 0 and 100? You could also say “I don’t think we’re going to convince each other in this conversation,” which is already politer, without having to ask someone to agree to something else that they don’t want to agree to.

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, dipshit, you’re just wrong.

      Your belief is simply, objectively incorrect.

      If I were wrong, you’d be able to convince me that I’m wrong. We can keep going until one of us accepts that we didn’t have an accurate understanding of reality.

      Boy if this doesn’t describe most people arguing online lol.

      which is something that I would be willing to accept.

      I’ve found this is much harder than it seems. People either don’t understand they’re wrong (which might be the reason they’re wrong to begin with) or unwilling to admit to being wrong even to themselves. So you’ll have the first part of my quote lol

    • Xariphon@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      1 year 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
        16
        ·
        1 year 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.”!

  • Okokimup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Anything described as “just common sense.” No, it’s knowledge/awareness that you picked up from your particular environment. Not everyone has had the same exposure as you.

    • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve found that “common sense” just means “things that I believe, but I can’t explain why”.

    • crapwittyname@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Common sense is just the set of prejudices acquired by the age of eighteen.”

      ~Albert Einstein

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      A while back I was in an internet argument about a bicycle race in which a parked car caused a massive pileup. People were saying in the comments that it was entirely the cyclists’ fault because they were all grouped up, and you never operate a vehicle if you can’t see some arbitrary distance in front of you, and the car was parked! Common sense applies in common situations. In a long distance bike race, there’s an assumption that the road is clear. It’s common in these races to be shoulder to shoulder with absolutely minimal forward visibility.

      A similar argument in that Alec Baldwin thing. “The four rules of firearm safety! Don’t point it at anything you don’t want to kill! Keep your finger off the trigger!” This was a movie set. It’s common on movie sets for the firearms to be checked and rechecked and checked again before they make it on set. If you’re at someone else’s house and they hand you a gun to look at, common sense applies–make sure there isn’t a magazine in, make sure there’s nothing in the chamber, and still don’t point it at your buddies. It’s different on a movie set. The common assumption is that the armorer has checked all the guns on set, and that the crew haven’t brought a bunch of live ammo to play with. Of course Baldwin should have checked the gun. And of course the cyclists shouldn’t have been so close together. But in a million other movies on a million other sets, and a million other races on a million other tracks, this was never a problem.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, this one annoys me no end. Especially as its used when workplace safety is concerned far too often.

  • skozzii@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year 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
        1 year 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
          ·
          1 year 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.

    • aidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year 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
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year 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
        ·
        1 year 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