▲ 739 ▼ That's a really good point. (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works 78 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 147 points 2 years ago (2 children) It’s better known by its stage name, diamond. permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago (2 children) A square is a rectangle, but a rectangle isn't necessarily a square Same with rhombus and diamond A rhombus is a diamond, but a diamond isn't necessarily a rhombus Rhombus has to have four equal sides, a diamond does not. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) I think most people would say a 2D shape that they'd call a diamond would have 4 equal sides. I don't think very many at all would call an elongated parallelogram a "diamond". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (2 children) If I took a traditional diamond shape and elongated just the bottom sides. I feel like most would call it a diamond still. Specific term would be a kite. Many wouldn't come up with that, though. It's not an elongated parallelogram. It is not a rhombus. "Diamonds" on bicycle playing cards have curved edges. They are not a rhombus because sides are not parallel. Most agree that it's the classic diamond shape, though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) If you give someone paper and a pencil and ask them, "Please draw a diamond shape." Most will draw a 4 sided shape with 4 equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides because they do not want to draw a sideways square, which is a rhombus, parallelogram, diamond too. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines No one at the end is going to be like "yeah but you have to be sure all sides are equal" when they have some kind of weird kite shape. There's people out there that wouldn't count a sideways square as a diamond permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) IDK why you think that "4 equal sides" is the same as "sideways square". You can (and frequently do) have equal sided diamonds that aren't "sideways squares". Seems like your main issue is geometry. People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides Which is fine. As long as they elongate symmetrically (which most would do), they're still four equal sides. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines Yes they would. In fact most would, I'd wager. Sounds like your concepts struggle is comprehending that "four equal sides" isn't the same as "four equal vertices". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago Or four equal angles. A rhombus has two pairs of opposing, equal angles. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago There is no such thing as a diamond in geometry. The correct term is a rhombus. That shape is a kite in geometry. You ask 100 people what that shape is. How many are going to say diamond? Even the people that believe diamonds have all equal sides would say "It's not a perfect diamond but it is diamond shaped" Imagine saying "It's not a perfect square, but it is square shaped" at a rectangle. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Kites have 2 edges the same length, as do trapezoids, but they aren't touching. A Rhombus has 4 equal edges. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) For me the shape I was thinking of was if you take a simplified 2D version of this 💎, with there being 4 sides, 2 pairs of equal sides but not 4 equal sides I imagine what people are talking about here is this ♦️ sort of diamond. I blame me not being a native speaker for thinking of diamon diamond permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) That shape in 2D has five sides though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago True, I didn't pay enough attention but I though the two upper sides touched each others at the top, so it would have just 4 sides permalink fedilink source parent [–] dudinax@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago (3 children) In practice, diamonds have equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 17 points 2 years ago (2 children) In practice, diamonds are rocks. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 15 points 2 years ago They're not rocks. They're minerals, Marie permalink fedilink source parent [–] dudinax@programming.dev -1 points 2 years ago In practice, diamonds are dirt paths with rubber vertices. permalink fedilink source parent [–] faceula@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Whut? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dudinax@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago When most people draw a "diamond" shape, they draw it with equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago 💎 what I'm thinking ♦️what I imagine is meant by diamond here permalink fedilink source parent [–] fat_stig@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago Yeah, Shine on You Crazy Rhombus would never have been a hit. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago (2 children) A square is a rectangle, but a rectangle isn't necessarily a square Same with rhombus and diamond A rhombus is a diamond, but a diamond isn't necessarily a rhombus Rhombus has to have four equal sides, a diamond does not. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) I think most people would say a 2D shape that they'd call a diamond would have 4 equal sides. I don't think very many at all would call an elongated parallelogram a "diamond". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (2 children) If I took a traditional diamond shape and elongated just the bottom sides. I feel like most would call it a diamond still. Specific term would be a kite. Many wouldn't come up with that, though. It's not an elongated parallelogram. It is not a rhombus. "Diamonds" on bicycle playing cards have curved edges. They are not a rhombus because sides are not parallel. Most agree that it's the classic diamond shape, though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) If you give someone paper and a pencil and ask them, "Please draw a diamond shape." Most will draw a 4 sided shape with 4 equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides because they do not want to draw a sideways square, which is a rhombus, parallelogram, diamond too. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines No one at the end is going to be like "yeah but you have to be sure all sides are equal" when they have some kind of weird kite shape. There's people out there that wouldn't count a sideways square as a diamond permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) IDK why you think that "4 equal sides" is the same as "sideways square". You can (and frequently do) have equal sided diamonds that aren't "sideways squares". Seems like your main issue is geometry. People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides Which is fine. As long as they elongate symmetrically (which most would do), they're still four equal sides. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines Yes they would. In fact most would, I'd wager. Sounds like your concepts struggle is comprehending that "four equal sides" isn't the same as "four equal vertices". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago Or four equal angles. A rhombus has two pairs of opposing, equal angles. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago There is no such thing as a diamond in geometry. The correct term is a rhombus. That shape is a kite in geometry. You ask 100 people what that shape is. How many are going to say diamond? Even the people that believe diamonds have all equal sides would say "It's not a perfect diamond but it is diamond shaped" Imagine saying "It's not a perfect square, but it is square shaped" at a rectangle. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Kites have 2 edges the same length, as do trapezoids, but they aren't touching. A Rhombus has 4 equal edges. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) For me the shape I was thinking of was if you take a simplified 2D version of this 💎, with there being 4 sides, 2 pairs of equal sides but not 4 equal sides I imagine what people are talking about here is this ♦️ sort of diamond. I blame me not being a native speaker for thinking of diamon diamond permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) That shape in 2D has five sides though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago True, I didn't pay enough attention but I though the two upper sides touched each others at the top, so it would have just 4 sides permalink fedilink source parent [–] dudinax@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago (3 children) In practice, diamonds have equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 17 points 2 years ago (2 children) In practice, diamonds are rocks. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 15 points 2 years ago They're not rocks. They're minerals, Marie permalink fedilink source parent [–] dudinax@programming.dev -1 points 2 years ago In practice, diamonds are dirt paths with rubber vertices. permalink fedilink source parent [–] faceula@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Whut? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dudinax@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago When most people draw a "diamond" shape, they draw it with equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago 💎 what I'm thinking ♦️what I imagine is meant by diamond here permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) I think most people would say a 2D shape that they'd call a diamond would have 4 equal sides. I don't think very many at all would call an elongated parallelogram a "diamond". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (2 children) If I took a traditional diamond shape and elongated just the bottom sides. I feel like most would call it a diamond still. Specific term would be a kite. Many wouldn't come up with that, though. It's not an elongated parallelogram. It is not a rhombus. "Diamonds" on bicycle playing cards have curved edges. They are not a rhombus because sides are not parallel. Most agree that it's the classic diamond shape, though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) If you give someone paper and a pencil and ask them, "Please draw a diamond shape." Most will draw a 4 sided shape with 4 equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides because they do not want to draw a sideways square, which is a rhombus, parallelogram, diamond too. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines No one at the end is going to be like "yeah but you have to be sure all sides are equal" when they have some kind of weird kite shape. There's people out there that wouldn't count a sideways square as a diamond permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) IDK why you think that "4 equal sides" is the same as "sideways square". You can (and frequently do) have equal sided diamonds that aren't "sideways squares". Seems like your main issue is geometry. People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides Which is fine. As long as they elongate symmetrically (which most would do), they're still four equal sides. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines Yes they would. In fact most would, I'd wager. Sounds like your concepts struggle is comprehending that "four equal sides" isn't the same as "four equal vertices". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago Or four equal angles. A rhombus has two pairs of opposing, equal angles. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago There is no such thing as a diamond in geometry. The correct term is a rhombus. That shape is a kite in geometry. You ask 100 people what that shape is. How many are going to say diamond? Even the people that believe diamonds have all equal sides would say "It's not a perfect diamond but it is diamond shaped" Imagine saying "It's not a perfect square, but it is square shaped" at a rectangle. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Kites have 2 edges the same length, as do trapezoids, but they aren't touching. A Rhombus has 4 equal edges. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) For me the shape I was thinking of was if you take a simplified 2D version of this 💎, with there being 4 sides, 2 pairs of equal sides but not 4 equal sides I imagine what people are talking about here is this ♦️ sort of diamond. I blame me not being a native speaker for thinking of diamon diamond permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) That shape in 2D has five sides though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago True, I didn't pay enough attention but I though the two upper sides touched each others at the top, so it would have just 4 sides permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (2 children) If I took a traditional diamond shape and elongated just the bottom sides. I feel like most would call it a diamond still. Specific term would be a kite. Many wouldn't come up with that, though. It's not an elongated parallelogram. It is not a rhombus. "Diamonds" on bicycle playing cards have curved edges. They are not a rhombus because sides are not parallel. Most agree that it's the classic diamond shape, though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) If you give someone paper and a pencil and ask them, "Please draw a diamond shape." Most will draw a 4 sided shape with 4 equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides because they do not want to draw a sideways square, which is a rhombus, parallelogram, diamond too. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines No one at the end is going to be like "yeah but you have to be sure all sides are equal" when they have some kind of weird kite shape. There's people out there that wouldn't count a sideways square as a diamond permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) IDK why you think that "4 equal sides" is the same as "sideways square". You can (and frequently do) have equal sided diamonds that aren't "sideways squares". Seems like your main issue is geometry. People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides Which is fine. As long as they elongate symmetrically (which most would do), they're still four equal sides. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines Yes they would. In fact most would, I'd wager. Sounds like your concepts struggle is comprehending that "four equal sides" isn't the same as "four equal vertices". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago Or four equal angles. A rhombus has two pairs of opposing, equal angles. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago There is no such thing as a diamond in geometry. The correct term is a rhombus. That shape is a kite in geometry. You ask 100 people what that shape is. How many are going to say diamond? Even the people that believe diamonds have all equal sides would say "It's not a perfect diamond but it is diamond shaped" Imagine saying "It's not a perfect square, but it is square shaped" at a rectangle. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Kites have 2 edges the same length, as do trapezoids, but they aren't touching. A Rhombus has 4 equal edges. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) If you give someone paper and a pencil and ask them, "Please draw a diamond shape." Most will draw a 4 sided shape with 4 equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides because they do not want to draw a sideways square, which is a rhombus, parallelogram, diamond too. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines No one at the end is going to be like "yeah but you have to be sure all sides are equal" when they have some kind of weird kite shape. There's people out there that wouldn't count a sideways square as a diamond permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) IDK why you think that "4 equal sides" is the same as "sideways square". You can (and frequently do) have equal sided diamonds that aren't "sideways squares". Seems like your main issue is geometry. People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides Which is fine. As long as they elongate symmetrically (which most would do), they're still four equal sides. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines Yes they would. In fact most would, I'd wager. Sounds like your concepts struggle is comprehending that "four equal sides" isn't the same as "four equal vertices". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago Or four equal angles. A rhombus has two pairs of opposing, equal angles. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago There is no such thing as a diamond in geometry. The correct term is a rhombus. That shape is a kite in geometry. You ask 100 people what that shape is. How many are going to say diamond? Even the people that believe diamonds have all equal sides would say "It's not a perfect diamond but it is diamond shaped" Imagine saying "It's not a perfect square, but it is square shaped" at a rectangle. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides because they do not want to draw a sideways square, which is a rhombus, parallelogram, diamond too. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines No one at the end is going to be like "yeah but you have to be sure all sides are equal" when they have some kind of weird kite shape. There's people out there that wouldn't count a sideways square as a diamond permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) IDK why you think that "4 equal sides" is the same as "sideways square". You can (and frequently do) have equal sided diamonds that aren't "sideways squares". Seems like your main issue is geometry. People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides Which is fine. As long as they elongate symmetrically (which most would do), they're still four equal sides. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines Yes they would. In fact most would, I'd wager. Sounds like your concepts struggle is comprehending that "four equal sides" isn't the same as "four equal vertices". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago Or four equal angles. A rhombus has two pairs of opposing, equal angles. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago There is no such thing as a diamond in geometry. The correct term is a rhombus. That shape is a kite in geometry. You ask 100 people what that shape is. How many are going to say diamond? Even the people that believe diamonds have all equal sides would say "It's not a perfect diamond but it is diamond shaped" Imagine saying "It's not a perfect square, but it is square shaped" at a rectangle. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) IDK why you think that "4 equal sides" is the same as "sideways square". You can (and frequently do) have equal sided diamonds that aren't "sideways squares". Seems like your main issue is geometry. People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides Which is fine. As long as they elongate symmetrically (which most would do), they're still four equal sides. There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines Yes they would. In fact most would, I'd wager. Sounds like your concepts struggle is comprehending that "four equal sides" isn't the same as "four equal vertices". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago Or four equal angles. A rhombus has two pairs of opposing, equal angles. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago There is no such thing as a diamond in geometry. The correct term is a rhombus. That shape is a kite in geometry. You ask 100 people what that shape is. How many are going to say diamond? Even the people that believe diamonds have all equal sides would say "It's not a perfect diamond but it is diamond shaped" Imagine saying "It's not a perfect square, but it is square shaped" at a rectangle. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago Or four equal angles. A rhombus has two pairs of opposing, equal angles. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago There is no such thing as a diamond in geometry. The correct term is a rhombus. That shape is a kite in geometry. You ask 100 people what that shape is. How many are going to say diamond? Even the people that believe diamonds have all equal sides would say "It's not a perfect diamond but it is diamond shaped" Imagine saying "It's not a perfect square, but it is square shaped" at a rectangle. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Kites have 2 edges the same length, as do trapezoids, but they aren't touching. A Rhombus has 4 equal edges. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) For me the shape I was thinking of was if you take a simplified 2D version of this 💎, with there being 4 sides, 2 pairs of equal sides but not 4 equal sides I imagine what people are talking about here is this ♦️ sort of diamond. I blame me not being a native speaker for thinking of diamon diamond permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) That shape in 2D has five sides though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago True, I didn't pay enough attention but I though the two upper sides touched each others at the top, so it would have just 4 sides permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) That shape in 2D has five sides though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago True, I didn't pay enough attention but I though the two upper sides touched each others at the top, so it would have just 4 sides permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago True, I didn't pay enough attention but I though the two upper sides touched each others at the top, so it would have just 4 sides permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dudinax@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago (3 children) In practice, diamonds have equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 17 points 2 years ago (2 children) In practice, diamonds are rocks. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 15 points 2 years ago They're not rocks. They're minerals, Marie permalink fedilink source parent [–] dudinax@programming.dev -1 points 2 years ago In practice, diamonds are dirt paths with rubber vertices. permalink fedilink source parent [–] faceula@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Whut? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dudinax@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago When most people draw a "diamond" shape, they draw it with equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago 💎 what I'm thinking ♦️what I imagine is meant by diamond here permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 17 points 2 years ago (2 children) In practice, diamonds are rocks. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 15 points 2 years ago They're not rocks. They're minerals, Marie permalink fedilink source parent [–] dudinax@programming.dev -1 points 2 years ago In practice, diamonds are dirt paths with rubber vertices. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 15 points 2 years ago They're not rocks. They're minerals, Marie permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dudinax@programming.dev -1 points 2 years ago In practice, diamonds are dirt paths with rubber vertices. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] faceula@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Whut? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dudinax@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago When most people draw a "diamond" shape, they draw it with equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dudinax@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago When most people draw a "diamond" shape, they draw it with equal sides. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago 💎 what I'm thinking ♦️what I imagine is meant by diamond here permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fat_stig@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago Yeah, Shine on You Crazy Rhombus would never have been a hit. permalink fedilink source parent