this post was submitted on
415 points (55% like it)
2,088 up votes 1,673 down votes
shortlink:

pics

subscribe2,654,960 readers

6,829 users here now

For an image subreddit with fewer restrictions, check out /r/misc!

A place to share interesting photographs and pictures. Feel free to post your own, but please read the rules first (see below), and note that we are not a catch-all for general images (of screenshots, comics, etc.)

Spoiler code

Please mark spoilers like this:
[text here](/spoiler)

Hover over to read.

Rules

  1. No screenshots, or pictures with added or superimposed text. This includes image macros, comics, info-graphics and most diagrams. Text (e.g. a URL) serving to credit the original author is exempt.

  2. No gore or porn. NSFW content must be tagged.

  3. No personal information. This includes anything hosted on Facebook's servers, as they can be traced to the original account holder. Stalking & harassment will not be tolerated.

  4. No solicitation of votes (including "cake day" posts), posts with their sole purpose being to communicate with another redditor, or [FIXED] posts. DAE posts go in /r/DoesAnybodyElse. "Fixed" posts should be added as a comment to the original image.

  5. Submissions must link directly to a specific image file or to an image hosting website with minimal ads. We do not allow blog hosting of images ("blogspam"), but links to albums on image hosting websites are okay. URL shorteners are prohibited.

  6. No animated images. Please submit them to /r/gif, /r/gifs, or /r/reactiongifs instead.

  • If your submission appears to be filtered but definitely meets the above rules, please send us a message with a link to the comments section of your post (not a direct link to the image). Don't delete it as that just makes the filter hate you!

  • If you come across any rule violations, please report the submission or message the mods and one of us will remove it!

Please also try to come up with original post titles. Submissions that use certain clichés/memes will be automatically tagged with a warning.

Links

If your post doesn't meet the above rules, consider submitting it on one of these other subreddits:

Comics  
/r/comics /r/webcomics
/r/vertical /r/f7u12
/r/ragenovels /r/AdviceAtheists
Image macros Screenshots/text
/r/lolcats /r/screenshots
/r/AdviceAnimals /r/desktops
/r/Demotivational /r/facepalm (Facebook)
/r/reactiongifs /r/DesktopDetective
Wallpaper Animals
/r/wallpaper /r/aww
/r/wallpapers /r/cats
The SFWPorn Network /r/TrollingAnimals
  /r/deadpets
  /r/birdpics
  /r/foxes
Photography Un-moderated pics
/r/photography /r/AnythingGoesPics
/r/photocritique /r/images
/r/HDR
/r/windowshots
/r/PictureChallenge
Misc New reddits
/r/misc /r/britpics
/r/gifs Imaginary Network
/r/dataisbeautiful /r/thennnow
/r/picrequests /r/SpecArt
/r/doodles /r/LookWhoIMet
  /r/timelinecovers
  /r/MemesIRL
  /r/OldSchoolCool
  /r/photoshopbattles
  /r/PastAndPresentPics .

Also check out http://irc.reddit.com

a community for
to anything interesting: news article, blog entry, video, picture...
message the moderators

MODERATORS

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

414
415

Skill Required vs Fame (a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net)

submitted ago by blacklist_member

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on
top 200 commentsshow all 235
sorted by:
best
best
top
new
hot
controversial
old

[–]MarkovMan 105 points106 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

From Surviving The World.

[–]iamanooj 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

He even has the STW thing at the bottom of pics that always get cropped out.

[–]daderade 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

am I the only one who has the deeply-rooted desire to punch that guy in the face? He has perfected the disgruntled nerd version of duckface.

[–]i_am_jargon 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Why is this not higher up? People need to know where this comes from. When someone posts a hosted comic in r/comics, there is an uproar. Here? Nothing.

OP even used a picture that cut off the url that's always at the bottom of Dante's (guy in labcoat) pictures.

[–]omgpro 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You know, I've seen these images posted so many times before, and I never knew what they were from.

[–]iamanooj 5 points6 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

There are over 1200 of these lessons by this point. Have a nice weekend.

[–]dustinechos 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The day I discovered XKCD I spent like 4 hours straight reading them. I thought it was time well spent, but then I discovered the alt-text and had to re-read all of them.

[–]iamanooj 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

What... alt text?

[–]dustinechos 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

For your sake I hope you're joking. If not, there's an extra joke in every xkcd in the hover text. place your mouse over a comic and count to three. You might want to cancel any plans you had this weekend. As a member of reddit you're legally bound to read it.

[–]eppey1 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Came here to find where they were from. Seriously, why is this post not at the top?

[–]rco8786 130 points131 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Athlete is most certainly wrong.

[–]Ontain 66 points67 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

i'd say athlete and musician are wrong. i mean just look at the no talent famous musicians. there aren't many famous athletes that have no talent.

[–]ScrambleSoup 47 points48 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And you can't auto tune an athlete.

[–]Russz 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Not all musicians use auto ntune. That's like saying all athletes use steroids.

[–]BabyEatingAtheist 15 points16 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The post isn't "Skill level vs. fame" it's "skill required vs. fame".

I'd argue being a famous athlete absolutely requires the highest skill level in the world at what you do. Being a famous musician, however, definitely doesn't require elite skill, although it helps. Lack of skill is nothing a talented producer can't fix. Listen to any Top 40 radio station, and you'll see that much is true.

[–]Lethysz 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

But that also depends on what we're on about when we say athletes. Some sports could be 'easier' yet give more fame than other sports.

[–]TheSwitchBlade 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The difficulty of a sport usually comes from the competition.

load more comments (1 reply)

    load more comments (2 replies)

      [–]Linktank 4 points5 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Don't forget no talent authors! (Twilight)

      [–][deleted] 4 points5 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      But there is few talented athletes that are not famous.

      [–]Ontain 7 points8 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      there are plenty. just go outside the 4 or 5 top sports. but if you're talented then you get fame would really go in line with the musician line.

      [–]723723 1 point2 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Kelly Slater #1 surfer in the world age 39 and going for his 11th world title...Not as famous as he should be....did i metion he dated pamala anderson , Gizel that moldel , carmen electra etc..

      [–]spit334 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Could be even tougher than that.

      For example, I have no idea who the top 1-miler is in the world. And I'm a track guy ...

      [–]combingmybaldhead 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      if these no famous musicians are without talent, how come you are not as famous as them or more? lemme guess, you never wanted to be a musician right? right!

      [–]CantHearYou -1 points0 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Lil Jon definitely has talent.

      [–][deleted] ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      [deleted]

      [–]Ontain 2 points3 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      who said anything about quality music? we're talking about fame and talent. are our most famous musicians today the most talented? i certainly don't think that's the rule.

      [–][deleted] ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      [deleted]

      [–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Easily digestible pop crap like Justin Bieber can be written by anyone. Someone already challenged me to this once, when I said I could write a shitty pop song in five minutes.

      I won the best. Wish I knew what I did with the mp3.

      The "talent" in popular music is the team of image-designers and promoters who get your saccharine crap out there in everyone's faces / ears.

      Rebecca Black is famous. You think she's talented?

      [–]SigmaDraconisIV 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Define musician.

      [–]BaconKnight 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      People love to shit on popular people they consider talentless hacks because it makes them feel better about themselves. I mean, yeah, I hate most musical artists in the top 40 right now, but to say they're talentlesss or skillless? Yeah yeah, "Justin Beiber, he gay lololol!" sure I can get behind that. But to think he doesn't practice the shit out of everything he does? The singing, recording, dancing, touring, appearances, etc. His end product might be something you consider shit, yes, but he's not talentless, not by a long shot.

      Same deal with other fields. People bring up actors and Keanu Reeves. "Lol, he's a bad actor! ahahahaha!" Is he De Niro? Of course not (though many would argue De Niro hasn't been De Niro since the early 90's). But you think what he's doing, as limited as it sometimes is, is easy? You wanna see how well you'd do as the leading man in the Matrix? Speed? Point Break?

      [–]Verbicide -1 points0 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Tiger Woods is cutting it close these days.

      [–]culturalelitist 1 point2 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Yeah, athletes have the closest correlation between skill and fame out of all these fields. Even in science, I'm sure there are scientists as skilled as Hawking or Sagan who aren't as famous because they never wrote popular science books.

      [–]absinthe718 1 point2 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      What about the Mendoza line?

      There is clearly a bottom end to athlete fame that correlates to just barely adequate skill.

      [–]rco8786 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      1) Somebody playing at the Mendoza line isn't going to be famous unless they are a pitcher, which comes with its own skillset.

      2) Even if you're batting .200 you're still playing pro ball. You are more skilled than 99.9999% of people out there.

      [–]jacobontheweb 1 point2 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Agreed. I think athlete and author should be swapped.

      [–][deleted] 4 points5 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Why ? Only a few authors gets well known, and they grab most of the attention. You can spend an entire life of reading without looking at new stuff.

      Even though competition is difficult due to the number of people, are many names in well known teams, with a good turn over, and people mostly care about fresh events.

      [–][deleted] 3 points4 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      stephanie meyer has no talent

      [–]mardish -1 points0 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Just because you don't appreciate her work doesn't mean she has no talent. I don't enjoy the books, but she wasn't randomly selected by some charitable organization to become a wealthy and famous author...she wrote books that people wanted to read, and obsessed over. That's her talent.

      [–]Dirty0ldMan 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      I'd say more like athlete should be placed near author.

      [–]TimMitchell 28 points29 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      According to a scientist

      [–]somethingsomethingso 24 points25 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      As a big fat guy working in a hard science I think athletes need a lot of skill.

      [–]f4hy 2 points3 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Sure, but this is the amount of skill required for fame (really skill should be the independent axis). Only ridiculously talented scientists become famous. It is much easier to become famous as an athlete than a scientist, it does not state that one profession requires or less skill than another.

      [–]somethingsomethingso 2 points3 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      I would say that you probably need two metrics for this sort of thing, how large the group of people know of the person (the real fame), and how some sort of measure of how well they are respected within that group (impact).

      Obviously any field that requires a lot of background to appreciate will be less commonly known than those that are easier to pick up the required knowledge (and I mean the knowledge base you need to understand sports too, not just science).

      And I think scientists that are famous in the general population are usually renowned for some specific important discovery (a once in a lifetime sort of thing), where as in the scientific community you can become more famous for a lifetime of amazing work, even if your work cannot be appreciated on a larger scale.

      [–]f4hy 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      scientists who are famous to the general popaultion may be renowned for a specific thing, but the same goes for athletes. Sure there are players who are great all around but lots of players are known for doing one specific thing. Mcgwire/sosa became famous during their record breaking homerun season but I know nothing of their careers before and after that. Players often become famous for being the first to do something, even if many people repeate that feat later.

      I am a scientist and yet I know the names of dozens of atheletes even though I am not a sports fan at all, however if I ask a nonscientist to name famous scientists I might get 5-10 total (I have tried this before, it is sort of fun.) The scientists the are named have done a once in a lifetime thing, people considered some of the best scientific minds of all time. However peope know the names of both current atheltes as well as those who are the best of all time.

      If people in general know only the best scientists of all time, but know a list of both current atheletes and the best athelets of all time, i think it is pretty strong evidence that oe can become famous in sport with having lower skill in that field. You don't have to be michael jordan to be relativly famous in sports, but no one outside of my dicpline will know my name unless I am the next einstien.

      Your statement about being famous within the field for a lifetime of good work is support for my thesis if you apply it to sport. Atheletes who have put in a lifetime of good work are known by their peers AND the general population even if they are not the "once in a lifetime" sort of person.

      [–]shawnaroo 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      I would argue that in a lot of fields, the skills that are required to become famous aren't entirely the same as the skills to actually be really good at your job.

      A decent level of competency is of course required, and being really amazingly good certainly can help you attain fame. But the reality is that the best way to become famous is to somehow entertain people. Carl Sagan was undoubtedly an accomplished scientist, but he's not famous for any of his experiments or theories, he's famous because he was really good at making science more accessible for non-scientists, and made some entertaining science television. And even a guy like Einstein, who's certainly renown for his actual scientific theories benefited from his quirky look and general quotability.

      [–]PoochDoobie 26 points27 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      As someone who plays some music, I can assure you, skill has nothing to do with success.

      [–]WMDistraction 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      As someone who plays a lot of music, I concur.

      [–]GuyDressedAsATurtle -1 points0 points ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      What about classical composers such as Mozart and Bach?

      [–]culturalelitist 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      This graph is really talking about fame in the now, though. If you fast forward a few hundred years, only today's best in every field will be remembered.

      [–]weezergiant 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Would you say that Maroon 5 has as much skill as they did? Absolutely not. But they are everywhere because they have mass appeal. There are always exceptions to the rule.

      [–]Russz 0 points1 point ago

      sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

      Talent probably. As a musician I don't really rely on skill to play, I rely on my instincts. Like if I were to sit down and play a tune, I wouldn't think about it, I would just do it. like second nature so to speak.

      load more comments (11 replies)

        [–]Darrian 24 points25 points ago

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        I wonder where "making graphs" is on that scale.

        [–]ooojos 35 points36 points ago

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        These axes seem backwards. I'd put fame of the y axis and skill required on the x axis.

        [–][deleted] ago

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        [deleted]

        [–]theamazingape 2 points3 points ago*

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Dante Sheperd is the guy who made it, he has a masters in chemistry.

        [–]TrollKy 2 points3 points ago

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Regardless, I agree with ooojos. Fame is the dependent variable and skill required is independent.

        [–]themattwhip 0 points1 point ago

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        He is wearing a lab coat.

        [–]ethraax 1 point2 points ago

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Not necessarily. For example, you could look at this as "How much skill do I need to achieve X level of fame?" If it said "skill" instead of "skill required" then you'd probably have a point.

        [–]Rahms 0 points1 point ago

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        No... As long as you are asserting that it is your skill that will get you famous (and not your fame building your skill), then skill should be along the bottom.

        [–]ethraax 0 points1 point ago

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        Except, as I said in my post, it's not "skill", it's "required skill", which means there may be more for you to get famous.

        [–]Rahms 0 points1 point ago

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        What? I know that's what you said in your post, and it's what I was replying to. Although whatever the end of this last post means, I am not quite sure (more what?).

        The point was that your post made no sense: Look up dependent vs independent variables. The convention for graphs is that the independent variable (i.e. the one affecting the other; this would be the one to do with skill, regardless of whether it says "required" or not) goes along the bottom. Required skill or not, it is affecting your fame and not the other way around.

        [–]bigmeech 0 points1 point ago

        sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

        this is bothering the shit out of me

        load more comments (7 replies)

          [–][deleted] ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          [deleted]

          [–]eleno 10 points11 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          That is not fair, she put tons of effort into that sex tape.

          [–]jchieng 11 points12 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Actually, she just kind of lied there. Ray Jay was doing most of the work.

          [–]SirRonaldofBurgundy 3 points4 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Hey, you got the joke! Neat!

          [–]CorkyKribler 3 points4 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Sure, William Faulkner was a genius. But did he have this?

          [–][deleted] ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          [deleted]

          [–]CorkyKribler 1 point2 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Disregard losing a butt; acquire side-bends and sit-ups.

          [–]Russz 0 points1 point ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Looks like SOMEONE saw her sex tape.

          [–]Beetlebub 2 points3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Obviously scientists just need to start making sex tapes...

          [–]fritzwilliam-grant 1 point2 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          They have to pay off that student debt somehow.

          [–]philipTraum 2 points3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          This is why scientists need to make more sex tapes. To think Carl Sagan was one DP scene away from reaching a world stage, becoming a household name, and enlightening all of humanity.

          [–]kaydub88 58 points59 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Oh yes, Athletes have less skill than scientists and musicians.

          I think this idiot that made the graphic doesn't understand what skill actually is.

          [–]biskino 75 points76 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          And I think you may have missed the word 'fame'.

          I'd argue it takes a lot more skill to be a famous athlete than a musician because athletes don't have as much scope to augment a lack of talent with good looks, promotion etc. But to be a FAMOUS scientist? How many scientists do you think the average USA Today reader could name? That's a seriously exclusive club.

          [–]OpenShut 6 points7 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Depends on what sort of musician to be famous concert pianist you have to be naturally talented and train constantly since childhood and still won't be a fraction as famous as bad football player. On the other side of the spectrum you have 'musicians' like Sid Vicious who was famous but shit.

          Also famous scientist are normally not the most skilled just the most publicly engaged. Basically this graph is completely retarded.

          [–]o0Enygma0o 2 points3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          yes, but the graph essentially states that the most famous athletes are only as skilled as the bottom quartile of scientists. that is plainly retarded.

          edit: probably half, not quartile.

          [–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          I'd say if you are a skilled athlete you almost always get fame, not so with musicians. So the fame per unit of skill might be said to be lower.

          [–]biskino 2 points3 points ago*

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Lot's of top class athletes live in obscurity too. Could you name a rock climber, weight lifter or cross country skier off the top of your head?

          But I also see what you mean. I guess it depends on intention. If you started of young with a desire to be famous you'd be better of being a musician because it's easier to get beyond a lack of natural talent. But if you start off with the intention of becoming highly proficient and have the chops then there are a lot more clear paths to fame as an athlete.

          [–]beat_the_heat 1 point2 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Not to mention the competition of overcoming genetic limitations of being an athlete. Example: Steve Nash has to be more skilled than any other PG because he can not jump higher or run faster than other athletes in his class.

          [–]fishyman 1 point2 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          You don't use "skill" as a scientist though..

          [–]UserNumber42 7 points8 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          I agree that musician and athlete should be switched. You can have very very little skill as a musician and still be very famous. You need to be good as an athlete to be famous.

          How many scientists do you think the average USA Today reader could name? That's a seriously exclusive club.

          Doesn't that sort of prove your point? I think Einstein had more skill than the last years number one draft pick for whatever, but that draft pick will be far more famous than pretty much any scientists.

          [–][deleted] 18 points19 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          I don't think you understand.

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          I thought USA Today was everywhere! I didn't know that my occasional stay in a hotel would grant me admission to a seriously exclusive club.

          But it's in color!

          [–]Steve369ca 2 points3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Yea what percentage of scientists become famous to percentage of athletes in all? I mean if you want to take ALL athletes and ALL scientists. When is someone considered a scientist? (I really don't know where you would classify that). But in general less than 1% of highschool athelets go on to college and play and less than 1% of those make it to the pros where they aren't always famous so I mean that is a small number. Just for sake of argument.

          [–][deleted] 7 points8 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          I think you're an idiot for not understanding what the graph means. It's comparing skill to fame, it doesn't comment on relative skill level in itself.

          [–]omgpro 1 point2 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          I wish I could upvote you to the top of this subthread. The graph is somewhat misleading and can easily be interpreted that scientists have the most skill but it's not saying that.

          What is IS saying is that scientists with a boat load of skill have very little fame while an athlete with the same amount of skill has much more, and so on.

          [–]sobelamp 0 points1 point ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Not necessarily, this is only true with high-profile televised sports. Most athletes don't get recognition beyond their community, whereas an author or a musician can get a lucky break and have their name in lights wherever they want. I completely agree with scientists receiving the least recognition, though.

          [–]omgpro 1 point2 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          for all you know the scale could be very nonlinear

          [–]kaydub88 -4 points-3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          I completely understand the graph. It is still saying that the scientists skills are higher than everyone else. Maybe it is you that is having problems reading the graph.

          [–][deleted] 3 points4 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          No, no it doesn't. It says that for a given level of skill there is a corresponding level of fame. There is no comment on a maximum level of skill. Look at the arrows on each axis. Those indicate that the levels of skill and fame continue indefinitely.

          [–]detroitcracker 1 point2 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          i think you dont understand the level of training it takes to be a scientist. the best are not only completely versed in their topics, they also are exquisite writers and possess the creative mind necessary to communicate complex ideas. also try running a 18 hour experiment on 4 hours of sleep while juggling some heavy reading during coffee breaks. it can be physically exhausting.

          and now that ive defended my profession... yea, i would say that the dude is comparing apples to oranges to elephants to waffles if he was only measuring skill. but hes expressing the relationship between skill and fame. how many athletes can you name? how many average athletes on your local sports or college team can you name? how many scientists can you name?

          [–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Sounds like you need more grad students.

          [–]o0Enygma0o 2 points3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          he probably is a grad student

          [–]modern_drift 1 point2 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          at least three of them asian.

          [–]kaydub88 2 points3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          If that's what he's trying to express, he did a shitty job at doing it. If he's a scientist, shouldn't he be better at expressing his thoughts?

          Do scientists think that athletes just wake up whenever they want, do a quick workout, and that's it?

          [–]goldenbunnies 4 points5 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Scientists know it takes a lot of work to become an athlete. I personally used to tutor athletes in college, and know the intense schedule they follow. But! if you think about the amount of work it takes to become famous, athletes have nothing on scientists.

          Scientists spend years finishing graduate school, and doing postdoctoral work before even starting their career.

          When does the average athlete start? Most of their careers are over before 35, so when you consider the years of work required to even break into the field, scientists absolutely must be build a more substantial skill set than athletes have.

          If you're talking about innate skill, and comparing age to age, then maybe I would say that a 23 year old athlete has more skill than a 23 year old scientist, but when you consider a FAMOUS athlete, and a FAMOUS scientist, an athlete can't hold a candle to a scientist.

          [–]kaydub88 0 points1 point ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          You tutored college athletes, not professionals. The amount of training that athlete did in college, definitely went up if they went to the pros.

          I still don't think you understand just how much training it takes to be an elite athlete. Actually, I'm sure of it considering you're trying to compare college athletes to professional ones.

          Athletes also spend YEARS honing their talents. And yes, those years are before even starting their careers as well. When would you even think a future scientist really starts putting in work to be a scientist? I'd think College, maybe high school for some, but really, college and grad school. Elite athletes typically start at a YOUNG age, check out Olympians. I'm a boxer so I'll use them for comparison, but Roy Jones Jr started boxing at 7 along with many other elite boxers.

          If anything, it takes a hell of a lot more as an athlete considering how hard it is to focus on something so intense as a kid. I can't imagine the kind of discipline these athletes have to do what they do.

          I don't understand why you're even still trying to compare, there's no way to compare someone that reads books, does studies, performs experiments with someone that runs, catches, hits, etc.

          [–]goldenbunnies -4 points-3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          If you would summarize a scientist as someone that "reads books, does studies, performs experiments" then I'm afraid you don't understand what being a scientist entails.

          No one becomes famous for doing an experiment: People become famous for designing an experiment.

          Consider someone like Tesla. It takes years of study to even understand the Mathematics behind what he accomplished let alone dream to one day design an experiment as clever as his.

          Now that I think about it, I know plenty of scientists that play sports for fun. Do you know any athletes that "hit the lab" in their spare time?

          [–]clipmann 2 points3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          Either that or got many wedgies from "athletes".

          [–]bobbles 0 points1 point ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          I dont know where to find the source but this more of a web-comic style drawing then some overarching view on society, he puts new ones up all the time

          edit: nvm its posted below: http://survivingtheworld.net/Lesson5.html

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          You completely misinterpreted the graph. It's sickening that this is the top comment.

          [–]alrij -4 points-3 points ago*

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          you think bouncing a ball takes more fucking skill than scientific progression? i cant downvote you enough

          5 jocks were displeased with this post. i dont mind

          [–]kaydub88 2 points3 points ago

          sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

          I can't downvote you enough for your closed mindedness and ignorance.

          You really don't understand sport if you think all it takes is being able to bounce a ball. There are such minute details in every sport that a non-participant wouldn't understand, even more minute details at the elite level.

          load more comments (6 replies)

            [–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Nobel Laureate physicists rule 34

            [–]bonnieprincebilly 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            It's the same guy from the how to get a gf as an engineering student pic. Creepy looking dude.

            [–]SirRonaldofBurgundy 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Trying to determine which out of musician, athlete, or actor requires the most skill is stupid. There are good and bad examples of all of these. In fact, the average professional athlete is much better at what he does compared to the general population than the average author or scientist.

            [–]honky_mcgee 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Skill does not equal intelligence...

            [–]bmac901 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            lmao at athlete being in the middle

            I guess everyone should just be an athlete then huh

            [–]doommagnet666 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Brilliant! This guy is awesome, I loved his banned by the Bible list as well.

            [–]BabyEatingAtheist 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            This is such a load of bullshit. Athletes train their entire lives, several hours a day, every day of the week, and still don't make it professionally. AAA baseball players, who (virtual nobodies in terms of fame) are still some of the most highly-skilled in the world at their craft. Even Anna Kournikova, who never won a WTA singles title, practiced from the age of 6, and entered a professional academy at only 7 years old.

            This is complete and utter nonsense.

            [–]CountingCats 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Scientist, authors, musicians, athletes and actors all require completely different skill sets to excel in their fields. Me thinks this graph is dumb...

            [–]EliteCorps 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            meh.

            [–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Stupid.

            [–]imgur-mirror-bot 2 points3 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            [–]capoeirista13 2 points3 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I can't believe people are actually arguing this.

            [–]RainDownMyBlues 2 points3 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            How about you link to the actual blog this comes from, rather than ripping it off as your own?

            [–]johnwalkerjunior 4 points5 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Teaching requires more skill, and receives less recognition.

            [–]Fremen13 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Stephanie Meyers and Ke$ha.

            Consider yourself disproved son.

            [–]dtriana -1 points0 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            You're a fucking retard.

            [–]firestarter764 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I was going to say that Albert Einstein was a clear outlier because, although an absolute genius, he was one of the most famous and recognizable people in the world. Then I remembered the rumors that he made a sex tape with Marie Curie and concluded that the graph in fact does line up.

            [–]gonemad16 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            eh not really true.. there are plenty of musicians with little skill that are famous

            [–]alrij 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            so wait being a musician takes as much skill as a scientist?

            [–]shakeyjake 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Is it me or has there been a noticeable drought in "accidentally leaked" celebrity sex tapes?

            [–]hannaha 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            OCD kicked in. There are more on one side than the other... O_o

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            This graph is bullshit. Playing a sport at a professional level is way harder than being born with a nice voice and a good body and banging on some generic chords to make a hit.

            [–]douglasmacarthur 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            These should be points. The lines are distracting and superfluous.

            [–]skytomorrownow 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I think you meant INTELLIGENCE required, not skill. Athletes definitely have skill.

            [–]culturalelitist 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Top athletes have to be intelligent too, depending on the sport and position. Sure, Usain Bolt didn't have to be too smart to dominate the hundred meter dash, but look at Peyton Manning.

            [–]Tayto2000 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Would swap athlete and musician for starters. Anyone who's involved in any sport knows how ridiculously talented people have to be to make it to the top.

            Obviously there are a lot of incredibly gifted people who are famous in the music industry, but my god, there are so, so many of them who barely have any talent at all.

            [–]Glorfon 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Artists would be a wildly wiggling completely unpredictable line.

            [–]Sphinkzy 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I would just like to point out that being a famous author is not the same thing as being a good author. Same thing goes for musician. Sarah Palin and Ke$ha are the first that come to mind.

            [–]headwithawindow 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Musician = disagree. Case in point: Mike Mangini compared to Lars Ulrich.

            [–]ZoomBlah 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            In terms of generalities though: Jimi Hendrix, Miles Davis, Bill Evans, Duke Ellington, Herbie Hancock, Paul McCartney, Paul Simon, Sting, Pavarotti, W.A. Mozart, J.S. Bach, J.C. Bach, LvBeethoven, John Williams (composer), Nobuo Uematsu, Koji Kondo, Debussy, etc. Masters of their craft recognized for more than a year.

            [–]headwithawindow 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Your list I don't disagree with, however it does not apply very well to contemporary music. A glimpse at the Billboard Top 100 tells a mixed tale of talent and marketing, suggesting that talent is not a requisite for fame. It may better apply to longevity, but unless my hallucinations are back the joke-chart we are scrutinizing doesn't say that. And Sting sucks. ;)

            [–]ZoomBlah 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I like to think that longevity is a precursor for fame, as I don't consider a short-lived fame really fame, but more of just a watercooler mention in the annals of history. As for Sting, I will concede your point, as I can't reasonably defend his skill myself, but I can say that I can't sing like that... ...at ALL.

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            the amount of skill isn't related to fame. overall, fame is available due to opportunity to be famous and not related to skill level. within each individual discipline, whether art, science or athletics, skill will allow the best to go to the top and achieve more fame within their discipline.

            so, the reason there are less famous scientists than athletes is there is less opportunity for a scientist to be "famous" in our society. within their field there is opportunity to become "famous", science lack broad appeal.

            scientists do not have more skill or work harder, they just have different skills. if they have a problem with their level of fame then they should just make sex tapes since it requires no skill and achieves maximum fame. right? ok then.

            [–]groverwood 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            i'd put athlete and musician wayyy above author.

            [–]dualspool 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            boston sucks.

            [–]megaoka 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Make a scientist sex tape?

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I'd reverse the labels on the X and Y axis.

            [–]sartreofthesuburbs 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            The occupations should be points, not lines.

            [–]HMJBurner 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Athletes and musicians need to be switched.

            Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber - insanely famous, marginally talented.

            [–]Trapline 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Lady Gaga is actually an immensely talented musician, but I appreciate your anti-popular music sentiment.

            [–]Rugbyjr 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            You have your dependent variable on the wrong axis. Skill should be on the x. Thank you come again.

            [–]pinkytheunicorn 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            LOL yes being an athlete requires little skill. Lets see you play a single game in the NBA.

            [–]JdoubleE5000 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Unfortunately, the "musician" moniker could be skewed as well (see: Sex Pistols). Then again, the term "musician" may not necessarily apply to some.

            [–]IamStrategy 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I am sorry I see no skill in most famous musicians now a days.

            [–]ghettovaquero 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I this guy, he is a human rage comic

            [–]fomorian 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            x and y axes should be reversed. Marks off.

            [–]username02 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Musician is more like a -x linear function.

            [–]downsouth 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Most people can write a book. Most people cannot be a professional athlete.

            [–]ruinercollector 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Most people can write a book. Most people can play a game of basketball.

            Writing a book doesn't make you a successful author.

            Playing a game of basketball doesn't make you a successful athlete.

            [–]ItsDare 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Author is just wrong. [1]

            [1] Twilight. Just fuckin' Twilight.

            [–]tPRoC 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            "artist" is not even on the graph

            :c

            [–]TheSemiTallest 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Am I the only person wondering why this is a line graph? I feel like it would be better as a scatter plot...

            Either that or instead of "skill required" it should just say "skill."

            [–]PancakePirate 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            This is a very badly drawn graph. It should be a scatter graph to show the correlation between skill and fame (with skill on the x axis, not the y axis). A line graph shows the effect of one variable on another; this graph shows that as your fame increases, your skill increases, which is just wrong.

            [–]Ragnalypse 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            TIL that it doesnt take much skill to be an athlete, and that high profile musicans actually have skill that they hide to confuse us.

            [–]Tal333 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Go red sox

            [–]Skulljoint 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            What if your a really good pornstar who can cum at command. That requires talent, right? Btw, athlete after musician? Really?

            [–]studflucker 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            This guy is retarded and most of his little pictures aren't that funny/relevant/interesting.

            [–]Notheusual 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I think it's easier to be a pro musician than pro athlete.

            [–]mkicon 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Most famous Musicians aren't anywhere near the top tier of musical talent.

            Nearly every famous athlete are among the top fractions of a percent.

            [–]Notheusual 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Yup.

            [–]imnotasavage 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            "creating this graph" is a single point at (0,0)

            [–]humanspace 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Obviously a scientist did this.

            Author down some... Athlete up some.

            [–]anarkingx 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            believe anything someone in a lab coat says

            [–]JustHere4TheDownVote 0 points1 point ago*

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Musician should be above sex tape. Scientist and author should be #1 and 2, because on a global scale, you need to have your book made into at least 2 movies to be able to say their name and most to know it.

            Athlete's have to be #3. This is from a fan of most sports. You can be the worst player in your sport and probably 1000 people knows your name, if not more. This cannot be said about Scientists and authors.

            Should be: Scientists > Author > Athlete > Actor > Musician > Sex tape.

            This isn't about "What takes the most skill to do", it's about how much skill do you need to be famous.

            I may even put actor in front of athlete. Just because if you play high school football, people outside the students and faculty will know your name, while some actor in some play may not. Also, on a pro level there are a lot more pro sport jobs than acting jobs that get any recognition.

            So really, it could easily be:

            Scientists > Author > Actor > Athlete> Musician > Sex tape.

            [–]rugger88 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I'd say there are probably a few more guitarists in the world than human beings who have such amazing athletic ability that people spend billions of dollars to watch them do it.

            Also it does not take a lot of skill to be bad at something. Anyone can write a book or act or even, dare i say it, be a scientist. It's how well you do it.

            Had you replaced skill required with value to society, you would have had a better argument.

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago*

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I think the skill involved with becoming a famous porn starring has less to do with on-screen ability, and far more to do with not destroying yourself with booze and drugs.

            [–]DistinctlyRandom 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            i'd say that acting actually does take skill, if you're doing it right

            [–]jspindell 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Actress should be way below actor

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I guess my biggest question would be, is SKILL the same as TALENT?

            [–]DJive 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I would put musician right above sex tape now a days.

            [–]knightmare07 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            What about a scientist that makes a sex tape?

            [–]MrSixFingers 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            So actors have only a little more skill that people who make sex tapes? Somewhere Daniel Day-Lewis is crying.

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            This graph would be more accurate if it was a scatterplot.

            [–]gunt34r 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            wrong. being an actor is much harder than you think, try reading about method acting and or christian bale.

            [–]petefic 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Acting requires hardly any skill? Orson Welles, Robert Deniro, Clint Eastwood, Morgan Freeman, Marlon Brando, Paul Newman, Al Pacino, Michael Caine, Bryan Cranston, Robert Mitchum, James Dean, Jack Nicholson, Anthony Hopkins, Laurence Oliver, Christian Bale, Peter Sellers, Heath Ledger, Edward Norton, Harvey Keitel, and Samuel L Jackson would like to have a word with you.

            [–]troydanger 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Musician should be the opposite direction FTFY.

            [–]dethrokk 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Fuck Fame, and athlete is most certainly correct.

            [–]ive_lost_my_marbles 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I think a lot of musicians put more demanding work into their training than anyone else on this list, but then they end up in conservatory and orchestras, and then that's not very famous. The ones that do become famous are usually rock or country acts, usually with the help of a producer. Even as a rock musician I'll admit the most talented often don't get their just desserts. And besides, the music making process is both technical and artistic, with many people helping it along. I think it takes more talent for young people these days to be able to take control of the writing, recording, and distribution, plus gigging than to simply play the instrument well.

            [–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            eh...

            [–]WAWAzing 0 points1 point ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Someone's a bit jealous.

            [–]diggydoc 0 points1 point ago*

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I think the word "skill" should be changed with the word "talent".

            [–]BaconKnight 1 point2 points ago*

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            Trying to be cute and clever but just coming across as condescending, ignorant, and petty. The only part of the joke that works is the sex tape line, yeah sure, lol I get it.

            But to then imply that successful acting requires any less skill than other professions is just such a mind blowingly insipid thought. To make this clear, I'm not an actor. I'm a video editor. But I been on set, I see the takes, I see what they do. It is not fucking easy. Try it out. Not in front of your mirror by yourself or in your head reciting lines. Try it out in front of a camera with a real script with another actor, even if it's just with your friends. You'll be amazed how bad you will be and how much work you have to put in to gain the skill to be an actual good actor.

            And yes, before anyone gets their panties in a bunch, I know it was just a joke and I should chill. But I'm not gonna mince my words and not express my thoughts that 1) it's a pretty close minded, offensive "joke" and 2) even barring that, it's not even that fucking funny.

            [–]Nobrat 3 points4 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            I don't know if you noticed but its essentially a graph of fame as a function of skill, given that the most brilliant living scientists today are almost unheard of in the general population - I'd say its making a relatively "solid" claim when it comes to scientists vs actors.

            Not to mince words 1) Grow up getting offended by this is embarrassing 2) Before you get offended by petty crap on the internet maybe at least understand what its suggesting?

            [–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

            sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

            But to then imply that successful acting requires any less skill than other professions

            This is not implied. Stop getting mad over your own failure to comprehend.

            load more comments (1 reply)

              [–]johnnyquest88 0 points1 point ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              To paraphrase Norm MacDonald on the matter. In regards to the reality show Chloe and Lamar, Lamar Odom came from a broken home, through endless hours of practice on the court and in the gym, against all odds, he eventually rose to stardom in the NBA. Chloe Kardashian's sister blew Ray Jay...

              [–]neelshiv 0 points1 point ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              I fucking hate this dude and every single picture he plasters his face all over.

              [–]mephaskapholies -1 points0 points ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              i firmly believe real acting takes more skill than a scientist downvote me if you must, but real actors, not these stupid pretty girls who just stand infront of a camera and say some words, but real actors dedicate every second to their art

              [–]Raelc 1 point2 points ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              i firmly believe real scientist takes more skill than an actor downvote me if you must, but real scientists, not these stupid nerdy guys who just stand infront of a test tube and do some experiments, but real scientists dedicate every second to their art

              [–]Inessia -1 points0 points ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              Switch Author and Athlete please.

              [–][deleted] ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              [deleted]

              [–]Fremen13 3 points4 points ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              That looks nothing like BJ Novak.

              [–]cogneuro 1 point2 points ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              Maybe it's his methed out brother PJ Novak.

              [–]Fremen13 0 points1 point ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              What?

              [–]RedheadCarpenter 0 points1 point ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              I can totally see him!

              [–]orangetoaster 0 points1 point ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              Source Comic page

              [–]Gyvon -1 points0 points ago

              sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

              Different skills != easier skills

              load more comments (3 replies)

                Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2012 reddit inc. All rights reserved.

                REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

                π Rendered by PID 4425 on app-138 running 9554f6e.