That’s interesting to know, thanks! Most coffee shops where I live would probably never get busy enough to use a spare shot. Perhaps they change out to a single shot portafilter, but I’ve never noticed.

Follow-up question - each portafilter is two shots right? So if you end up adding an third shot to a coffee, what do you do with the leftover fourth one?

(Or do you have a smaller, single shot portafilter?)

Perhaps

Squeak :3

So it’s an average of the different isotopes that can be found? That’s interesting, I wonder how they work out that average. Do you have to take samples all over the world?

I saw a thumbnail, noped out of there and closed Lemmy for the day just to be safe. Seriously what the fuck is wrong with people ._.

First it’s the ants, and now rodents aren’t allowed to read? And sapient paper cups? Unbelievable

You better deliver on this…

Took me a minute

The ant apocalypse doesn’t sound all that bad to be fair. Lets give them a chance

Thank you, appreciate it

I don’t think the personal attack is really necessary. I do legitimately want a discussion about this, but people are getting the impression that I want to distract from the point of the post, which I promise you is not my intention. I apologise if anything I’ve said has come across that way. I shall leave things here.

Ok my friend. If I have distracted from the message, that is genuinely not my intention. I’ll leave things here.

What makes you say myself and the other poster are being ‘deliberately obtuse and pedantic’? It’s pretty hurtful and that is not my intention in the slightest. I’m not trying to undermine the argument made by the post, I just think it’s a valid concern when the figures don’t add up and it’s worth discussing.

You seem to have a very binary view of things though. Is it not possible for someone to agree with a message, but think we can improve on how we tell it? If we want to convince people of something, is it not best to provide as convincing an argument as possible? I’m not trying to distract from the message, I’m wondering how we can tell it better.

I’m not quite sure what you mean by ‘people like me’. To be 100% clear, I agree with the point of the post but I just don’t think they’ve gone about explaining it in the best way. To somewhat agree with what you’re saying, I’d say yes, analogies and accurate statistics don’t fit well together, but neither do analogies and statistics in general. Either stick to written analogies/hyperbole OR use actual statistics.

Lol fair enough, I can understand why you’d think that.

I’m quite capable of thinking figuratively. But in the way that this post is framed, I’m pretty sure any layperson would take the figures as being based on some actual statistics. It’s deceptive, and I don’t think that’s a good look if anyone were to look into this in any detail. If you’re going to make an analogy, make it actually analogous. And if you want to use hyperbole, use it in a way that’s clear (i.e. by not mixing in numbers)

It doesn’t seem like this post was meant to be hyperbolic though? Hyperbole doesn’t work well in the context of numbers. If someone said 1 in 100 people drive a Toyota, how would I differentiate that from being an actual figure or hyperbole? It’s not obvious unless you look into it. Likewise, if someone told me that 1 in 400 people in the US get shot every day I’d struggle to tell if that’s true or not, given how much I hear about gun crime over there.

This post is quite clearly framed in a way that sounds like fact.

How would being more accurate distract from the point? I agree with what the post is saying, but making up statistics doesn’t really help IMO and takes away from the credibility

Thanks for explaining this. So were there many Roman citizens in Britannia, or was it a pretty small ratio of Romans to locals? Did the Roman soldiers give commands to the local elites, who would then tell the locals what to do? And would you say that life changed much for the locals under the new rule?