What is Digg?207 Comments
- vroom101, on 10/11/2007, -3/+74I didn't know that, now I do, thanks to DIGGucation.
- manicleek, on 11/07/2007, -0/+68I thought ALL women could see whatever they wanted to see. Even if it never happened.
- atdigg, on 10/11/2007, -5/+65which man would willingly admit that he knows what "burgundy color" is...
- SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -0/+51Guys see in 16 colors... We're like EGA monitors.
- mcsenerd, on 10/11/2007, -4/+38Everyone knows women have extra green vision receptors...and we all know why :)
- jersey, on 10/11/2007, -0/+31I always tell my digital photo students this, but for some reason they've never believed me. Even after citing articles such as this, they just stare at me, like I've got my dick in my hand.
- iflipti, on 10/11/2007, -1/+27That's why I ask my wife to pick out my tie.
- thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+23After trying to pick out paint with my wife.... YES.
- nartvq, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17I can see all the colors I could possibly want with the right combination of recreational pharmaceuticals...
- galemathias, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17More shades of green ... what a waste. Infrared og Ultraviolet, now that would be something.
- Slovenian6474, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18About 4MP with a 3x digital zoom and built-in flash with red eye reduction.
- ThinkBox, on 10/11/2007, -4/+21Not to bitch, but I really hate this form of title phrasing. Sometimes I answer outloud in an obnoxious voice, "No, I wouldn't"
- xtmno3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17or take your Johnson out of your hand.
- brstilson, on 10/11/2007, -7/+21What's this? A BENEFICIAL human mutation?
How are the creationists going to explain this one? - 350Zed, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14So what does the fourth receptor actually see? Nowhere in the article can I find anything about this person being properly tested, and results being shown confirming or denying that she can see into the ultraviolet spectra.
Dugg down for being useless trivia without any hard scientific results. - Amoeba16, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12I hate the smurple background on that page. It would clearly look better if it were grellow.
- Viliam, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14"How are the creationists going to explain this one?"
They will burn the witch, and no explanation is necessary. - NeoMatrixJR, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14FINALLY...an answer to why our lives have to SUCK every time they drag us to the mall!!! Oh...and this chick sucks for male bashing...there's pleanty of things we're better at. .
What? We're DIFFERENT...men and women are DIFFERENT...in a good way, to compliment each other, not to be better or worse than one another! - orlyfactor, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15There's got to be a reason so many of them are insane, on antidepressants, and just crazy. Maybe it's the elusive 4th color. I think it's Cyan, C for crazy. RGBC, yeah.
- Smills, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11I didn't get that (since I live in Australia and our money is not green) so thanks NeoMatrixJR.
- brstilson, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Not me, I'm Hercules Monochrome.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10About 324 mega pixels, and an average of 10,000 brightness levels (a lot more than the typical 256 in digital images).
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/eye-resolution.html - CapitolK, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Would you believe that "would you believe" is a very annoying way to start a title?
- Unlegend, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9"For Americans, some of the world spell color as colour and colorblind as colourblind and so on. This is just to help the search engines to find this page."
I am slightly embarrassed that the writer of the article felt the need to clarify this. - ekstasis16, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Why none other than the man himself, Ron Burgundy
- sukimashita, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8If you are surprised, then you never been shopping with women. They always seem to see more colors than I do in all shoes, bags, ...
- NycterisA, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12@mannaran (according to http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/eye-resolution.html) But the human eye really sees a larger field of view, close to 180 degrees. Let's be conservative and use 120 degrees for the field of view. Then we would see 120 * 120 * 60 * 60 / (0.3 * 0.3) = 576 megapixels.
- Konstantino, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8http://duggmirror.com/health/Would_You_Believe_That_Some_Women_Can_See_More_Colors_Than_Most_of_Us/
Duggmirror caught it (kinda). - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Get them high before you talk about that kind of stuff.
- Rushg60, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Whats the deal with the not-so-subtle male bashing in the article? "puny and rather ineffectual Y chromosome, commonly known as "men''?? Penis-envy anyone?? It's a strange attempted insult for someone who is trying to claim superiority based on greater astuteness of the subtle. What she gains in color perception she loses in understanding of genetic signalers. And when did essays with blatent sexism start winning awards? Oh yeah - when they target men.
- pizzler, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10I can believe it :)
- trying2hide, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Thanks for settling that argument with my husband.
...and my boss
and my... - silverchrysalis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7*****.
i'm a girl, and i know there are at least 8 others on here regularly. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6It also makes it MUCH harder for me to follow up on my comments later...which ***** sucks. I used to be able to just hit Ctrl+F and type the first couple letters of my name. Now it's a ***** scavenger hunt. SUCKS.
"Now WHICH of these did I comment on?" *clicks on replies of 47 top comments before FINALLY finding the right one, thus wasting *tons* of time* - drobati, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I thought the most interesting part was about the pigeons.
- lithuin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I'm by no means an expert (I'm not even sure I'd qualify as an amateur.), but I'm not certain the eye can even be thought of in those terms, so I refuse to believe that site, even though it's 404 so I don't know what it says... Even if you could calculate a resolution based the various receptors in the eye, at no point does the human eye see individual dots (Unless you are actually looking at dots.). Various optical illusions show that the human brain processes the input and interpolates data in ways that we (I) don't fully comprehend. Even if you were able to see something so small that only a single photon of light reflected off of it into your eye, I'm not convinced that you would see a single "pixel."
I will, of course, provide no sources, references, or even links to cool optical illusions that demonstrate my assertion. - slaystench, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Yes, we all know this.
- EvolvedAnt, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Learning about God's existance or lack thereof based on Digg comments is like learning about women based on Digg comments. Try learning from those with experience instead.
- jlebrech, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6That's why they buy 10 different version of what look to be the exact same shoes or dresses. But they in fact have different tones.
But then again guys might change cars quite often to impress and the women would be oblivious to that, in the same way that we don't really care about the color of the shoes. - LukyJay, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5What about orange? Thats rather "hip"
That my friends, was a joke. Now bury my lame ass. - macaddct1984, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I bet that's why they have an easier time distinguishing between black and dark blue...
- laserblazer, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6A man who drinks wine from time to time?
- subliminalurge, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Definitely.
My vision is pretty good, even after 20 years of staring at computer monitors for 10+ hours per day it still tests better than 20/20, and I wouldn't consider myself color blind at all. Even so, I have a very hard time telling the difference between navy blue and black, unless the two items are held right next to each other.
Every woman I've ever mentioned this to looked at me like I had a third arm growing out of the top of my head. - Sundyr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4You missed an important point in the article. In order to be a "tetrachromat", you must have 4 vision distinct vision genes. The X chromosome has 2: red and green. Blue is located elsewhere. Males, being XY would get blue by default, plus 2 from the X. That gives 3. A trichromat. It isn't possible for a man to have 4. Females on the other hand, get the blue by defualt just as a man does, but then have two X genes. Each gives a red and green, for a total of FIVE vision genes. They have a redundant red and a redundant green. This is why women are much less likely to be a color blind, since BOTH reds or BOTH greens would have to not work. The crux of the article is if one of the redundant reds or greens is slightly offset in the spectrum it handles (which the article states is fairly common, as there is variance in the general population) AND the brain is wired right to handle the visual processing, then a woman could be a tetrachromat. Interestingly, it is possible that if both redundant reds and greens were shifted, it would be possible to be a quintachromat. If the estimate is that 2-3% of women are tetra, then chances are some 0.02% or so might be.
- hakkamacher, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Yeah, but what about UV? Some people claim that HID car headlights look no different than regular lights, when they obviously have a "purplish" tint to them (that drives me crazy)...
- nesibus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I was wondering why my wife kept saying the digg back ground looks so pretty with all the shades of color....I only see white...
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Of course! Who the hell else would come up with "periwinkle," "puce," "muave" and "terracotta?" Sometimes I think they do it just to ***** with us male graphic designers.
"You want that in WHAT color?!? Screw that! Give me the Pantone number." - NeoMatrixJR, on 10/11/2007, -7/+11Easier to see the MONEY! (ok, sorry...that was bad, but I had to do it...)
- EvolvedAnt, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Just replying to you to make someone else waste their time making ANOTHER additional click for nothing other than to emphasis how poor this commenting system is.
This has been brought to you by the campaigne against Digg comments 2.0 feel free to copy and paste into other topics or as a reply to this very comment for emphasis. - EvolvedAnt, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8I don't believe everything said in this article. For one thing, there is only 3 primary colors, which in turn can be used to create every other color of the rainbow. In the end of the article it says "Sorry, we can't give you a tetrachromat test because your monitor only has 3 colours. :-)" as if you need some 4th primary color (which does not exist) to be able to create new colors that we can not see. No, it is far more likly that the extra cone in these women allow them to better distingish differences in similair colors near the wavelength of the color they have an extra cone for. Infact the article even mentions they can see further into the ultraviolet range. It does not make the rest of us color blind compared to them, they just have a higher resolution or clarity between similair colors. The article is written in kind of a "Haha nah nah, we can see more than you can!" tone, when in reality the difference between three cones and four is the like the between 20/20 vision and 10/20.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 203 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is