That is not the case! My problem with sarcasm is that it's not actually funny.
A thread on sarcasm—
That is not the case! My problem with sarcasm is that it's not actually funny.
But this joke is not at all sarcastic.
"Are you going to Johnny’s party?"
"Nooo, I’m going to be a total loser and stay home."
This is sarcasm (accompanied by a laugh track):
https://t.co/zTmo911V9N
It\u2019s always just a cheap shot disguised as humor. Occasionally it\u2019s done well - majority is just meanness. Prov 26:18,19 Like a madman who shoots fiery missiles, arrows, and death* 19 Is the man who plays a trick on his neighbor and says, \u201cI was only joking!\u201d
— WesternWalking (@westernwalking) February 20, 2023
Guy 1: Oh, you're painting your fence today?
Guy 2: No, I'm milking cows on jupiter, while drinking light soda and driving.
Guy 1: Was that sarcasm?
Guy 2: Now, why would you think that?
https://t.co/uKtX4Huz42
What this culture thinks is smart:
— Andrew Algra (@AndrewAlgra) February 19, 2023
Saying the opposite of what you mean.
What is smart:
Saying what you mean.
Snark is not a substitute for wit.
https://t.co/zDPhglJbFj
A large part of this modern irony and sarcasm are a poison in our veins. It makes people act like twats and then they mock anything serious while being completely unfunny.
— C\U0001f90dMFY (@AhComfy) February 20, 2023
But this is obviously far from ideal, and even then these tools should be used with caution.
More from All
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.