• LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      White? Or is it the background for the time left in the quarter you meant? The scores appear to be white on blue and white on black. Not sure why they did the WNBA logo to be on orange though. The shot clock being on red makes sense to me as it is the “imminent danger”. (Probably could just do black on white for it though)

  • justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Might depend on the material. I have -3.5dpt on both sides and my glasses have half the width and glare. Or are those some random units again?

        • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          23 hours ago

          Going for “I see you” with a plausible but bullshit unit name but yours works too. Maybe they keep getting into accidents and landing in the ICU because of poor eyesight.

          • justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Aaah… So ist not the original prescription, rather the hit count. Like snipers carve lines in their rifle.

            Now it all comes together!

    • Redjard@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I assumed he’d estimated it based on how distorted the face appears behind the glasses. I do that all the time.

      At this angle it’s hard for me to do that, since I usually use the edges of the face to estimate it. negative glasses pull the line inwards, positive outwards. I can reliably tell when someone is wearing fake glasses (0 strength) for example, and probably estimate strength within 30% of the actual value.

      If the image was higher res maybe I could estimate this case too. Or this professional optometrist is just a lot better at it than I am.


      Strong negative glasses: (Note the faces contours in the glasses appearing well inside the faces contours around the glassed)

      Fake glasses:

      Positive glasses:


      PS: Searching for generic terms yields 100% fake glasses, so I took a specific person I remember having strong glasses for myopia.

      • justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Just looked in the mirror… Checks out! :)

        Thanks for the explanation. And yeah, on the op picture you can’t see any of that clearly, so he needs to have serious practice for that statement.

      • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        PS: Searching for generic terms yields 100% fake glasses, so I took a specific person I remember having strong glasses for myopia.

        Just love it thanks

      • DaGeek247@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        16 hours ago

        This is so cool. Thank you for sharing how to do that.

        At this angle it’s hard for me to do that, since I usually use the edges of the face to estimate it

        This is a screenshot of a photo, but you can still see the left side offset if you zoom in. The original photo likely has much better quality to see it with.

  • jeffep@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    36
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Great response, given that the alternative was to double down and take the lifelong commitment to the path of misogyny

    • Uruanna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      18 hours ago

      It is fair to be confused and not know that he’s really talking about the prescription if you don’t know what that is and you don’t know Dr. Glaucomflecken is an actual ophthalmologist from his comedy Youtube shorts.

    • Hozerkiller@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I’m assuming you are talking about Ethan but I’m not sure how misogyny or shitting on someone talking about glasses are the only 2 options?

      • jeffep@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Oh dear I should really be more careful with irony in written text or else feel the wrath of the mob! 😅 I meant that calling her a -1 can be interpreted as pretty offensive and Ethan pointed that out. Now the other guy saw the issue and corrected his comment with a follow up. I just meant that he did that in a really good way. He could have also chosen to never admit a mistake and just become a misogynist now.

        • Hozerkiller@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          -1 was obviously about her glasses. The screenshot is basically going “look at this idiot who didn’t realize that” nobody did anything misogynistic in the screenshot and being heavyhanded in labels like that make it easier for actual examples of misogyny to be dismissed.

          • nile_istic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            I think what Jeff is pointing out is that it isn’t uncommon for someone to be misinterpreted as a misogynist and, when called out, decide to lean into the misogyny rather than away, even if it wasn’t their original intention. In this instance, it’s a miscommunication that the OP handled in a way that made me laugh out loud, but I think Jeff is right, that there are also people who, in the same situation would have responded something to the effect of “I was talking about her vision. Maybe if you women weren’t all so [insert twitter-typical misogyny here]”, etc etc. Obviously that isn’t what happened here, but it has been known to.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          I’ve never seen a double whoosh before. It’s one thing to not get the joke, it’s another thing to not get the joke after the joke has been explained to you.

    • lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      19 hours ago

      i think he is referring to the strength of her prescription. a -1 or -1.5 diopter prescription is mild - i.e. her glasses aren’t strong enough for the person she offered them to. misogyny was not intended

    • Buffy@libretechni.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      18 hours ago

      What? I think you missed what he is saying like the reply to him. He was talking about her glasses not her looks. If he doubled down it would have just been him explaining what he meant and that would be that.

  • null@lemmy.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I’m putting on my needs context hat and standing next to the needs context sign.

    • Redacted@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 hours ago

      The doctor is saying what her likely rx is, the responder i think assumes hes talking about her attractiveness out of 10, or is just being a snarky dick.

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Comment refers to the girl’s eyeglass prescription, not a ranking of her attractiveness.

      Based on the distortion visible in her glasses, her prescription is approximately -1.00 to -1.50 diopters. Severely nearsighted prescriptions would cause the wearer to appear to have much smaller eyes; farsighted prescription would cause the eyes to appear larger.

    • Aqarius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Diopter was my first reading too, and my account isn’t even “Dr. Glaucomflecken”.

      • SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Guy is a social media actor shorts comedian and is pretty based. So not only would he not say something like shitty that, he wouldn’t say it publicly. On yt he has 1.27m subscribers.

    • DaGeek247@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      16 hours ago

      My reading of it following the ethans point of view first. People are different. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • gergo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    18 hours ago

    she does look a lot like Paige from The Americans tho, i gemuinely thought it was her

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 hours ago

    So given Dr. Glaucomflecken is an opthalmologist, I’m at least 37.3% sure he meant her eyeglass prescription in diopters. Isn’t that right, Johnathan?

  • sangeteria@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 hours ago

    This interaction truly tickled me in a way that I had to comment lol, even if it’s not furthering the convo. Great post!