I just watched a compilation of those clips and I had to stop after one clip showed some kind of lizard smashing a mouse against the side of its terrarium until it broke in half.
They used to be funny, that was just fucked
Yeah that's just messed up.
Some people, in trying to one up each other, decide the way to do so it be as edgy as possible, but miss the point of the meme for the sake of edginess and shock-value
you would think as an IT director, who has dabbled in programing and the use of zero indexing arrays, would have picked up on that.
Good thing I am retiring in a few years.
Wow you arranged 21 words in grammatically correct order yet together they mean absolutely nothing.
Edit - I understand what OP is trying to say, you don't need to explain it. OP is taking a very common expression way too literally. What they're saying is not deep or clever, it's nothing. It's also written very poorly.
He just means to say that 100+% effort is non sensical.
Kind of like how if you give final warning, it makes sense. It has credibility. But if you give 2nd final warning, it makes no sense. People will expect 3rd, 4th, 5th final warnings and word 'final' loses all credibility.
I think they meant in situations such as your boss saying “we are gonna be busy, everyone will need to give 110%” are completely meaningless. If you can’t acknowledge someone giving their all, why is demanding 110% going to be any better?
It’s like saying “I won’t acknowledge you putting in all your effort, so I’m definitely not going to acknowledge you putting in even more”.
I don't agree with your interpretation of the phrase. There are real situations where you can put in over 100% to a job:.
If I work my contracted hours each week, then I'm putting in 100%, so if I work 10% over my contracted hours, then I'm pitting in 110%...
It means if 100% is not the top, and you can always do 110%, then you can do 110% of that 110%...which means infinity is the top, which also means any finite amount of effort is nothing compared to your supposedly illimited potental.
Haha no worries, illimited is actually a word and means the same thing as unlimited. It's just very uncommon to use, it made it seem like you were trying to sound smarter by using a less common word lol.
Your English is otherwise very good, I would have guessed that you're a native speaker.
Here I am giving 80%.
Personally I think 80% of anything is the long term sustainable limit. 80% disk space used up, 80% expenditure with 20% savings, etc.
Yeah, that’s a good shower thought but it’s a terrible way to look at the math.
Let’s say I want to put on a little weight so I start eating 110% of my necessary caloric intake I’ll start gaining weight all things being equal. Is my capacity to eat infinite? No. It probably caps out about 200%. Maybe some of you can do better. But nobody’s doing 10,000%.
Most systems can be overstressed. 100% is full capacity, full effort, under sustainable normal conditions. if somebody’s asking you to do more than 100% at work, just make sure there’s a reward involved.
> What they're saying is not deep or clever
In other words... It's a shower thought? If only there was some kind of place where he could share such a thing!
what? i found their post perfectly understandable first time around. i agree it’s not that deep, but it’s certainly not meaningless, and it’s definitely not written poorly.
Dawg you just can't read. It makes perfect sense, and the original phrase is dumb as hell. Given there's only one pizza, I can't have 110% of a pizza.
And for the other style, the whole point of a 0-to-10 style scale like that is to have a minimum and maximum. If you say you're higher than 10 on the scale, all you've done is raise the maximum and still said you're at the maximum. You've added nothing and just confused the system for no reason.
They do mean something, just not absolutely nothing, but you weren’t saying that he made completely
No sense with his words, but that you had a little trouble deciphering his message .
You're wrong for a few reasons. Mostly because "100%" absent a relevant context doesn't mean anything.
Yes, saying "I want you to give 110% of maximum effort" is impossible, but you're deliberately ignoring the fact that it's only said as an encouragement and not meant to say "I need you to run faster than your body is capable of" as an example.
Secondly, if someone said "would you rather stay at 100% of your current salary, or make 110% of your current salary going forward" there's no rational person who would say "nah a 10% bump isn't enough to be worth it."
Maybe it’s just because I’m an engineer, but that’s not how percentages work.
100% does not equal the absolute maximum in lots of cases. It’s usually some nominal amount of something that’s basically considered to be max NORMAL value.
If my windshield washer fluid tank has an 2 liter capacity, that’s its 100% rating. There’s probably a fill line. If I fill it to the top of the filling port and it holds 2.2 liters it’s at 110% of capacity.
Generally, when you exceeded 100% you’re counting on some sort of margin that’s been built-in to the system. You’re not supposed to count on that margin on a regular basis because that margin is there to provide you with safety or robustness.
And that’s actually what happens when people ask you to give 110%. They’re saying, this is so important that I want you to not only work up to your regular capacity. I want you to exceed that capacity, which is likely unsustainable while retaining physical and mental health. It’s a game company in crunch mode. It’s the military on a field exercise. It’s the first six months of parenting a colicky baby.
Somebody working 60-hour weeks is in many ways giving 150%. Some people can keep that up for years. Most people end up sacrificing some amount of their family, life, health, education, or other aspects in order to feed that afterburner.
It’s actually really hard to know what the absolute maximum of most systems are. Trying to assign that 100% value means you have a moving target and you don’t actually understand what 50% might look like. How many people can you fit into a minivan? If you count seats, 7 (or 8) is 100%. Putting somebody in the lap and you’re over 100%. If you do the old college student cram, you can get 10. 11. 14? Who knows? How are you going to base an idea of 100% on a number that could change with a little bit more effort and Vaseline?
If 100% IS the top then 110% effort is the thing that makes no sense. If 100% isn't the top then there isn't a limit, so going from 100 to 110 when 1000 or 1,000,000 are options too seems a lot less impressive.
Going 110% is the difference between staying 8 hours at the office or 8 hours and 48 minutes. Or about the difference between taking your lunch brake or working though it.
10% more doesn't sound like much, especially when you image that somebody else could be giving 300% more. But in most situations a sustained 10% difference is actually huge
**Hypnotist**: You will give 110 percent.
**Players**: That's impossible. No one can give more than 100 percent. By definition that is the most anyone can give.
- "Homer at the Bat," The Simpsons
I’ve always thought that the whole “110% effort” thing is baloney, I’m waiting for an interviewer to go for the crestfallen response to the 110% statement and ask “why not 120 or 130%…? it could’ve made all the difference!”
The most effort you should put into any job is 30%. Not 100%, and certainly not 110%. Because 100% leaves you with no effort to spend recovering, maintaining, or enjoying the fruits of your labor.
Either you mean this in terms of effort etc in which case 100% is literally everything you can give. 110% doesn’t really exist.
Or you mean this in math terms and if that’s the case then 110% is 10% more than 100%.
Either way this is dumb as hell.
Damn how is everyone 1) not understanding, or 2) shitting on this post. It’s a valid showerthought and also I completely agree. Saying “I need you to give it 110%” is so stupid
Most people dnt know their true 100%, only what they think it is or what they want it to be, or what they've defaulted to for comfort or sustainability to avoid burnout.
Thus in that case asking for 110% is doable.
If you've done research to quantify what 100% performance is, then yes asking for more is funny.
But in layman's terms, it means try harder than your usual trying.
100% performance that is being reported after testing and measurement of a product is rarely the maximum though. It’s the maximum that can be guaranteed under controlled and repeatable circumstances.
Change the circumstances and you change the performance.
A bridge will have a maximum load and I can almost guarantee every bridge can hold 110% of their maximum loads because of things like concrete getting more solid over time, the fact the max was made thinking of a life span of the bridge and reducing that slightly through higher weight won’t break the bridge one one occasion, calculations for safety are always rounded down to make things more safe etc…
Yep. Hyperbole in the place of literalism, with a side of innumeracy. 101%, 110%, 1000%, all unquantifiable expressions of "more" or "a lot." I'm not a fan of shoehorning numbers into adjectives for the unquantifiable.
Though, stepping out of the shower, it does become valid when we shift to the quantifiable. We could see a 110% increase in year over year profits. A modified engine might make 128% of the base model's horsepower. So there is a space where percentages over 100 are valid measurements.
But in the realms of shower thoughts and common usage, I agree 110%.
A 10% incremental increase, applied consistently over time, yields exponential improvement. Once 110% defines your new normal baseline, another 110% on top of that gets you to 121% of the initial performance. And after 8 cycles you’ve doubled. I’d harldly call that worthless.
I think a better way to think about the expression is that 100% represents 100% of what we think is possible from a person/thing/event. If someone gives 100%, then they do the best job we can possibly imagine them doing. If they do 110%, then they do better than we thought was possible for them.
With the assumption that 100% isn't the max, but is constant value X effort, then 110% effort would still be an increase in effort of 0.1X.
That is very noticeable and impactful, not "infinitesimal." Ask anyone with an auto loan with 10% APR if their interest rate is infinitesimal. It's only "infinitesimal" if you assume that X is *supposed* to be The Absolute Max Limit Effort (let's call it 20,000,000X, or just Y) achievable by the Do-er of the thing, and afterwards directly compare the actual output 1.1X to 1.1Y.
Given the expression "Give 110%" is meant to mean "Give more than you currently consider your best," and the metric of performance is how much more they are outputting, then the increase in output is the entire (and only) goal of the statement. It doesn't matter that 110% may be a real-value increase that is imperceptibly closer to The Absolute Max Limit. If The Absolute Max Limit is the real goal, then a different statement with clearly defined metrics is absolutely necessary: "Give 110%" ain't it.
I find it best for scheduling, energy, and sanity reasons to consider 85% to be 100%. My normal, engaged, 100% effort should only be using 85% of my resources. I can go over if I absolutely have to, but I'm not drained all the time.
OP is acting intelligent and deliberately misconstruing a common hyperbole. He's actually a 12 year old skibidi toilet bruh funnier, he posted this in his discord and I saw it
As long as you realise that 110% isn’t sustainable.
If 100% actually indicates potential expenditure, then 100+ is not worthless, it is finite and not-without risk. And any employer/coach who demands it daily, is doing his charges a disservice.
I took a management class in college and when discussing goals, it should be 10% above obtainable. If the goal is too far out of reach, people will give up before starting. If the goal is too easy to reach, then they will stop once the goal is reached. I always thought this may explain the 110%.
Sorry to say OP that you will never make it as a production manager. Best quit your job and go do something stupid like pursue your dreams or try to find joy in every day life. Fucking nerd. I'll be at my machine turning out profits for suits that don't even know my name.
the effort you are willing to put in is 100%, anything above or below is how much more or less you are doing
my normal effort for something is 100%, my max/can do no more is around 400%, you could pay me to do maybe 250-300 for a few days at a time, but only my hobbies get my 400% when it matters, I will not get burnt out doing shit I don't actively want to do.
As soon as you accept that giving 100% on Monday might look different than giving 100% on Tuesday due to any one of a billion factors completely outside of your control, you finally learn to stop judging yourself so harshly and lead a much happier life.
it depends what you're talking about. most efficiency %'s are estimates either going off prior output or going off material stress tests if you're an engineer.
So an engine can go above its normal operating capacity as defined by the people who built the engine. Do ya want this engine to run at 150% and last 1/4 as long as it would operating at 100%? That's definitely possible to break the specs of an engine. Same thing with **over**clocking a computer. It's doing more than it was designed for
*Ya gotta get away get away from single factor analysis when analyzing complex things
I've honestly never understood the 110% thing.
I get that it's a pump up. It implies doing more than you need to, but then why stop there? Why not go for 500%? Or 10,000%?
And my analytical brain always tells me "Uh, you literally can't do more than 100%."
I mean even a smidge of context would be helpful here.
But if you’re saying what I think you’re saying… I disagree. 100% does not mean you are physically giving it EVERYTHING you have. It means you are working extremely hard to deliver maximum reasonable results.
We could ALWAYS be doing more. No one is ever giving truly every single ounce of energy they have towards a task. It happens but not often.
If you take 100% to be the reasonable maximum expected effort than 110% is actually a big step up.
I put 100% into making dinner today by spending an hour prepping and getting stuff marinading last night and then an hour cooking tonight. That is like maximum expected effort. At least in my house.
But if I gave 110% that might mean waking up and driving an hour to the woods and fighting off bees to collect some fresh, natural honey for the glaze. Like that is above and beyond.
That’s kinda true but is it even worth it?
Let’s say you have a $100, and a thing that you want costs $110. If 100% is the top, you definitely can’t get it because a 100% of your total net worth is $100. But with a loan, you still can get that thing you want right? That’s how you can spend 110% of your total net worth.
But surely with loan comes interest, so is spending 110% going to be worth it? If you put in 110% of your time, effort and health into something, it’s definitely going to cost you something in the long run.
It's a calibrated 100%, not raw numbers.
Maxing out the output of a system is dangerous, so the system limits you to say, 80%. In that case, 80% is 100% of your safe output. That way, when you give 110%, you're operating in the danger zone.
Why not just label 100% as 100%? Because idiots would always be operating themselves and other people to death.
What does someone mean when they say "give 110%"? They mean "go risk hurting yourself for my benefit".
And that's why we need unions.
Above 100% can make sense when you more than double something. But if you're using it as a scale then stick to the scale. You don't give 6 out of 5 stars. You don't rate an 11 on a scale of 1-10. Giving 110% violates the 1-100 scale Internet to percentages.
If you have 1 of something and end up with 3 by the end then obviously you had a greater than 100% increase. But that's accounting for an increase above the expected amount. Hence why the scale was exceeded.
Just crank it up to 11
And how is that different to the ones that go to ten?
Well, its one louder.
Why not just make 10 louder and have 10 be the top number and make that a little louder?
then it wouldn’t go up to 11
Yea but if you did make it 10, you could then make an 11.
You’re supposed to say “these go to 11”
\*long confused pause then 'these go to eleven'
Yes! Hahaha I gotta watch it again now
For $500 I'll make it go to 12
Too late. They've already got 'em!
*Chews gum* These go to eleven
Don’t point at it even! Can I look at it? No! You’ve seen enough of that one.
Thats what it feels like to chew five gum!
\*video of someone getting a bat to the balls\* ***Stimulate your senses*** lol we need to bring back this meme
I just watched a compilation of those clips and I had to stop after one clip showed some kind of lizard smashing a mouse against the side of its terrarium until it broke in half. They used to be funny, that was just fucked
Yeah that's just messed up. Some people, in trying to one up each other, decide the way to do so it be as edgy as possible, but miss the point of the meme for the sake of edginess and shock-value
An infinitesimal increase and absolutely worthless.
That's why I put in 1100%
“Well, I’m sure I’d feel much worse if I weren’t under such heavy sedation.”
my car stereo goes to 63. why 63?
If it includes zero, then that’s 2^6 =64 increments, aka 0-64. That’s the biggest number that can be stored in 6 bits.
you would think as an IT director, who has dabbled in programing and the use of zero indexing arrays, would have picked up on that. Good thing I am retiring in a few years.
Wow you arranged 21 words in grammatically correct order yet together they mean absolutely nothing. Edit - I understand what OP is trying to say, you don't need to explain it. OP is taking a very common expression way too literally. What they're saying is not deep or clever, it's nothing. It's also written very poorly.
I thought it was just me having a stroke.
Seriously. It's poorly written and also just complete BS.
It's dangerous because one day I might actually be having a stroke and I won't be able to differentiate.
I hope you're not
I thank you for your concern, internet stranger
Op going 110% on the title
I thought I was in LinkedIn for a moment. Perhaps that explains the upvotes.
They’re saying if 100% isn’t actually 100%, then there’s no scale for effort and the numbers mean nothing
He just means to say that 100+% effort is non sensical. Kind of like how if you give final warning, it makes sense. It has credibility. But if you give 2nd final warning, it makes no sense. People will expect 3rd, 4th, 5th final warnings and word 'final' loses all credibility.
I think they meant in situations such as your boss saying “we are gonna be busy, everyone will need to give 110%” are completely meaningless. If you can’t acknowledge someone giving their all, why is demanding 110% going to be any better? It’s like saying “I won’t acknowledge you putting in all your effort, so I’m definitely not going to acknowledge you putting in even more”.
"ok boss, are we getting paid 110%?" "no"
[удалено]
It is and always has been a dumb saying, though.
It's a stupid idiom that reveals more about the speaker than anything else.
I don't agree with your interpretation of the phrase. There are real situations where you can put in over 100% to a job:. If I work my contracted hours each week, then I'm putting in 100%, so if I work 10% over my contracted hours, then I'm pitting in 110%...
The saying isn’t used for situations like that though
It means if 100% is not the top, and you can always do 110%, then you can do 110% of that 110%...which means infinity is the top, which also means any finite amount of effort is nothing compared to your supposedly illimited potental.
Mfw when they say illimited instead of unlimited 🥴
English may not be their first language; we say "ilimitado" in Portuguese!
I made a mistake, I am italian and made a rough translation of "illimitato"
Haha no worries, illimited is actually a word and means the same thing as unlimited. It's just very uncommon to use, it made it seem like you were trying to sound smarter by using a less common word lol. Your English is otherwise very good, I would have guessed that you're a native speaker.
That's unlegal!
anime logic
[удалено]
People that say they give 110% don’t understand what 100% is.
Here I am giving 80%. Personally I think 80% of anything is the long term sustainable limit. 80% disk space used up, 80% expenditure with 20% savings, etc.
Yep this is how I saw it too
Yeah, that’s a good shower thought but it’s a terrible way to look at the math. Let’s say I want to put on a little weight so I start eating 110% of my necessary caloric intake I’ll start gaining weight all things being equal. Is my capacity to eat infinite? No. It probably caps out about 200%. Maybe some of you can do better. But nobody’s doing 10,000%. Most systems can be overstressed. 100% is full capacity, full effort, under sustainable normal conditions. if somebody’s asking you to do more than 100% at work, just make sure there’s a reward involved.
Ohhh, thank you, the post made no sense to me
110 to 100 looks really really small when on the scales of infinities.
> What they're saying is not deep or clever In other words... It's a shower thought? If only there was some kind of place where he could share such a thing!
what? i found their post perfectly understandable first time around. i agree it’s not that deep, but it’s certainly not meaningless, and it’s definitely not written poorly.
This sub has been having some pretty low quality posts lately
Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
How much shower did it take to have this thought?
It's technically a shower thought, but like, the little shower at the pool that they make you stand under for a sec before you get in
So like, 10% of a shower? Relatively insignificant
OP took 10 tabs of acid and was in the shower for 3 days to come up with this thought
Dawg you just can't read. It makes perfect sense, and the original phrase is dumb as hell. Given there's only one pizza, I can't have 110% of a pizza. And for the other style, the whole point of a 0-to-10 style scale like that is to have a minimum and maximum. If you say you're higher than 10 on the scale, all you've done is raise the maximum and still said you're at the maximum. You've added nothing and just confused the system for no reason.
They do mean something, just not absolutely nothing, but you weren’t saying that he made completely No sense with his words, but that you had a little trouble deciphering his message .
You're wrong for a few reasons. Mostly because "100%" absent a relevant context doesn't mean anything. Yes, saying "I want you to give 110% of maximum effort" is impossible, but you're deliberately ignoring the fact that it's only said as an encouragement and not meant to say "I need you to run faster than your body is capable of" as an example. Secondly, if someone said "would you rather stay at 100% of your current salary, or make 110% of your current salary going forward" there's no rational person who would say "nah a 10% bump isn't enough to be worth it."
Maybe it’s just because I’m an engineer, but that’s not how percentages work. 100% does not equal the absolute maximum in lots of cases. It’s usually some nominal amount of something that’s basically considered to be max NORMAL value. If my windshield washer fluid tank has an 2 liter capacity, that’s its 100% rating. There’s probably a fill line. If I fill it to the top of the filling port and it holds 2.2 liters it’s at 110% of capacity. Generally, when you exceeded 100% you’re counting on some sort of margin that’s been built-in to the system. You’re not supposed to count on that margin on a regular basis because that margin is there to provide you with safety or robustness. And that’s actually what happens when people ask you to give 110%. They’re saying, this is so important that I want you to not only work up to your regular capacity. I want you to exceed that capacity, which is likely unsustainable while retaining physical and mental health. It’s a game company in crunch mode. It’s the military on a field exercise. It’s the first six months of parenting a colicky baby. Somebody working 60-hour weeks is in many ways giving 150%. Some people can keep that up for years. Most people end up sacrificing some amount of their family, life, health, education, or other aspects in order to feed that afterburner. It’s actually really hard to know what the absolute maximum of most systems are. Trying to assign that 100% value means you have a moving target and you don’t actually understand what 50% might look like. How many people can you fit into a minivan? If you count seats, 7 (or 8) is 100%. Putting somebody in the lap and you’re over 100%. If you do the old college student cram, you can get 10. 11. 14? Who knows? How are you going to base an idea of 100% on a number that could change with a little bit more effort and Vaseline?
Godzilla had a stroke and f*cking died
I agree with this 1000%.
And not 2000% ??? Come on, have true opinions
but 100% is the top? I'm confused
That extra percentage is what's above the nether in Minecraft
This sub used to be fun
OP's really getting the rough end of the stick in a sub which is 110% (heh) not serious.
Nice try engineer, but this won’t get the mathematicians to forgive you for rounding g up to 10
You mean IS the top? Otherwise this makes no sense.
If 100% IS the top then 110% effort is the thing that makes no sense. If 100% isn't the top then there isn't a limit, so going from 100 to 110 when 1000 or 1,000,000 are options too seems a lot less impressive.
Oh yeah, makes sense.
Yeah, I understand what it means. Makes sense to me.
Yea it all makes sense now. I understand now.
Going 110% is the difference between staying 8 hours at the office or 8 hours and 48 minutes. Or about the difference between taking your lunch brake or working though it. 10% more doesn't sound like much, especially when you image that somebody else could be giving 300% more. But in most situations a sustained 10% difference is actually huge
Shouldn't be eating lunch while driving bro
I'll just claim I wrote it like that to confuse future AI trained on these comments
Doesn’t seem less impressive to me
100% is the top of what's expected, so 110% is still impressive.
anyone who thinks 100% isn't the top needs to return to math class and stop exaggerating things for effect.
[удалено]
I probably could have phrased it slightly more accessibly, but thank you.
**Hypnotist**: You will give 110 percent. **Players**: That's impossible. No one can give more than 100 percent. By definition that is the most anyone can give. - "Homer at the Bat," The Simpsons
What does this even mean If you believe in Math, 100% is definitely the top
I’ve always thought that the whole “110% effort” thing is baloney, I’m waiting for an interviewer to go for the crestfallen response to the 110% statement and ask “why not 120 or 130%…? it could’ve made all the difference!”
imagine trying your hardest but harder.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UMbYsb26eg
I used to drink in a bar where I would run into Limmy! Didn’t realise I thought so closely.
The most effort you should put into any job is 30%. Not 100%, and certainly not 110%. Because 100% leaves you with no effort to spend recovering, maintaining, or enjoying the fruits of your labor.
God, you lot are so dumb. It’s pretty simple. Get a life.
Either you mean this in terms of effort etc in which case 100% is literally everything you can give. 110% doesn’t really exist. Or you mean this in math terms and if that’s the case then 110% is 10% more than 100%. Either way this is dumb as hell.
Well this shower thought is definitely not 100%
Bro I read, this got a fucking stroke and died
This thread is hilarious. First true shower thought I've seen in ages and people are completely misunderstanding it.
Thank you.
It’s not that people are misunderstanding, it’s just plain dumb.
Is it supposed to be 100% is the top? Or am i just stupid, because i dont get wtf this means.
Damn how is everyone 1) not understanding, or 2) shitting on this post. It’s a valid showerthought and also I completely agree. Saying “I need you to give it 110%” is so stupid
There are a lot of very literal people in here 😂
Thank you.
Most people dnt know their true 100%, only what they think it is or what they want it to be, or what they've defaulted to for comfort or sustainability to avoid burnout. Thus in that case asking for 110% is doable. If you've done research to quantify what 100% performance is, then yes asking for more is funny. But in layman's terms, it means try harder than your usual trying.
100% performance that is being reported after testing and measurement of a product is rarely the maximum though. It’s the maximum that can be guaranteed under controlled and repeatable circumstances. Change the circumstances and you change the performance. A bridge will have a maximum load and I can almost guarantee every bridge can hold 110% of their maximum loads because of things like concrete getting more solid over time, the fact the max was made thinking of a life span of the bridge and reducing that slightly through higher weight won’t break the bridge one one occasion, calculations for safety are always rounded down to make things more safe etc…
110% of your average effort. Extra effort per time interval.
Why an infinitesimal increase? It’s a 10% increase. The baseline (100%) clearly being what you think you can give.
I can't decipher what this language means
I wouldn't call it infinitesimal. That's a 10% increase. That's pretty significant.
fuck, youre right i didnt know the encouragement part
Yep. Hyperbole in the place of literalism, with a side of innumeracy. 101%, 110%, 1000%, all unquantifiable expressions of "more" or "a lot." I'm not a fan of shoehorning numbers into adjectives for the unquantifiable. Though, stepping out of the shower, it does become valid when we shift to the quantifiable. We could see a 110% increase in year over year profits. A modified engine might make 128% of the base model's horsepower. So there is a space where percentages over 100 are valid measurements. But in the realms of shower thoughts and common usage, I agree 110%.
That depends. 100% can be the maximum effort you can sustain, but for short periods of time you can burst up higher.
A 10% incremental increase, applied consistently over time, yields exponential improvement. Once 110% defines your new normal baseline, another 110% on top of that gets you to 121% of the initial performance. And after 8 cycles you’ve doubled. I’d harldly call that worthless.
right!? what does 110% even mean? If you've performed better today than in the past that means today was your 100% and your past history is less.
So many words and 0 meaning.
Also can’t stand how my phone battery indicator ever says 100% while unplugged. The second you unplug the charger it should say 99%.
What are you on about mate lay of the crack n smack son
100% is the known max...what we're looking for is to go beyond the known maximum to a 110% of the known max...next time...that 110% is just 100%.
I think a better way to think about the expression is that 100% represents 100% of what we think is possible from a person/thing/event. If someone gives 100%, then they do the best job we can possibly imagine them doing. If they do 110%, then they do better than we thought was possible for them.
Engineers I tell ya. The ability to overthink everything is the worst superpower imaginable.
That’s why you’ve gotta strive to be at the tippity top of the mountain, and literally only halfway up.
no such thing as 110%. also there is no such thing as 100%... its always 99.999999 or less.
I think "giving 110%" is just an expression and not meant to be considered as an actual mathematical estimate of generated effort.
I think the idea is 110% of what you think you can do. In most facets of life, you can dig deep and give more than your 100% with the right approach.
life coaches getting really mad at you ITT lmao
'It means do everything. Plus enthusiasm'. We all know things we can do 100% and we know there's still extra when you really care. Thats 110%
100% was never the top. 100% was what you were normally expected to do, or what you had planned to do
Then explain how Scotty always manages to improve on "givin' her all she's got"
With the assumption that 100% isn't the max, but is constant value X effort, then 110% effort would still be an increase in effort of 0.1X. That is very noticeable and impactful, not "infinitesimal." Ask anyone with an auto loan with 10% APR if their interest rate is infinitesimal. It's only "infinitesimal" if you assume that X is *supposed* to be The Absolute Max Limit Effort (let's call it 20,000,000X, or just Y) achievable by the Do-er of the thing, and afterwards directly compare the actual output 1.1X to 1.1Y. Given the expression "Give 110%" is meant to mean "Give more than you currently consider your best," and the metric of performance is how much more they are outputting, then the increase in output is the entire (and only) goal of the statement. It doesn't matter that 110% may be a real-value increase that is imperceptibly closer to The Absolute Max Limit. If The Absolute Max Limit is the real goal, then a different statement with clearly defined metrics is absolutely necessary: "Give 110%" ain't it.
There is no such thing as 110% effort, assuming 100% means "everything you are capable of". It's just capitalist bullshit.
I find it best for scheduling, energy, and sanity reasons to consider 85% to be 100%. My normal, engaged, 100% effort should only be using 85% of my resources. I can go over if I absolutely have to, but I'm not drained all the time.
Honestly you can give 110 % but it feels like anything above 100% means you need to spend time below 100% plus that's how you learn your limits.
100% effort is for ass kissers. Nose stay brown, even if their pay goes down lol
People up-voted this absolutely worthless shower thought.
This only applies to people who don't give %100 effort, and if they don't give %100 effort then they don't matter anyways
I understand your point except the infinitesimal part.
ITT people willfully ignoring or misinterpreting what “give 110%” means or is meant to mean
all i know is that if you're bragging about giving 110% to your boss you're bragging about taking a 10% pay cut because you're a moron.
OP is acting intelligent and deliberately misconstruing a common hyperbole. He's actually a 12 year old skibidi toilet bruh funnier, he posted this in his discord and I saw it
https://youtu.be/gxptjJmeXi0
I’m finna take a poop on an elevator and take this shit to the next level 😎
Basically whenever someone is saying 100% they mean 90% - and when they say 110% what they really mean is 100%
Wow, it’s like one of those Successories posters, just as stupid while somehow managing to make less sense.
As long as you realise that 110% isn’t sustainable. If 100% actually indicates potential expenditure, then 100+ is not worthless, it is finite and not-without risk. And any employer/coach who demands it daily, is doing his charges a disservice.
I took a management class in college and when discussing goals, it should be 10% above obtainable. If the goal is too far out of reach, people will give up before starting. If the goal is too easy to reach, then they will stop once the goal is reached. I always thought this may explain the 110%.
The top is the top, however that is represented - if it is legitimately 100% of /a thing/ anything more than that is, well, more than that.
Sorry to say OP that you will never make it as a production manager. Best quit your job and go do something stupid like pursue your dreams or try to find joy in every day life. Fucking nerd. I'll be at my machine turning out profits for suits that don't even know my name.
the effort you are willing to put in is 100%, anything above or below is how much more or less you are doing my normal effort for something is 100%, my max/can do no more is around 400%, you could pay me to do maybe 250-300 for a few days at a time, but only my hobbies get my 400% when it matters, I will not get burnt out doing shit I don't actively want to do.
Go back to the shower
As soon as you accept that giving 100% on Monday might look different than giving 100% on Tuesday due to any one of a billion factors completely outside of your control, you finally learn to stop judging yourself so harshly and lead a much happier life.
As soon as you accept that 110% isn’t the top, 100% effort (or anything) is an infinitesimal effort and absolutely worthless.
And yet, 100% is the top, and if it's truly 100%, you die at the end...or you didn't actually give it your all
“Better” is the enemy of “Good enough”
it depends what you're talking about. most efficiency %'s are estimates either going off prior output or going off material stress tests if you're an engineer. So an engine can go above its normal operating capacity as defined by the people who built the engine. Do ya want this engine to run at 150% and last 1/4 as long as it would operating at 100%? That's definitely possible to break the specs of an engine. Same thing with **over**clocking a computer. It's doing more than it was designed for *Ya gotta get away get away from single factor analysis when analyzing complex things
If 100% is not the top, you are not giving 100%. There is no such thing as 110% effort.
Depends on the event,action or situation an additional .10% of effort could be all it takes or even too much, more variables required.
Isn't 100% the max of something? What am I missing
Looks like the comments have deployed the anti-humor defense system. Damn, people.
I've honestly never understood the 110% thing. I get that it's a pump up. It implies doing more than you need to, but then why stop there? Why not go for 500%? Or 10,000%? And my analytical brain always tells me "Uh, you literally can't do more than 100%."
I mean even a smidge of context would be helpful here. But if you’re saying what I think you’re saying… I disagree. 100% does not mean you are physically giving it EVERYTHING you have. It means you are working extremely hard to deliver maximum reasonable results. We could ALWAYS be doing more. No one is ever giving truly every single ounce of energy they have towards a task. It happens but not often. If you take 100% to be the reasonable maximum expected effort than 110% is actually a big step up. I put 100% into making dinner today by spending an hour prepping and getting stuff marinading last night and then an hour cooking tonight. That is like maximum expected effort. At least in my house. But if I gave 110% that might mean waking up and driving an hour to the woods and fighting off bees to collect some fresh, natural honey for the glaze. Like that is above and beyond.
It’s all about efficiency min/max.
That’s kinda true but is it even worth it? Let’s say you have a $100, and a thing that you want costs $110. If 100% is the top, you definitely can’t get it because a 100% of your total net worth is $100. But with a loan, you still can get that thing you want right? That’s how you can spend 110% of your total net worth. But surely with loan comes interest, so is spending 110% going to be worth it? If you put in 110% of your time, effort and health into something, it’s definitely going to cost you something in the long run.
This is some hustle culture bullshit.
These go up to 11, man.
Return to math class
Shower thoughts should make sense.
Now I have something to say to my boss. Thanks
Thanks for the incomprehensible motivation, chatGPT.
It's a calibrated 100%, not raw numbers. Maxing out the output of a system is dangerous, so the system limits you to say, 80%. In that case, 80% is 100% of your safe output. That way, when you give 110%, you're operating in the danger zone. Why not just label 100% as 100%? Because idiots would always be operating themselves and other people to death. What does someone mean when they say "give 110%"? They mean "go risk hurting yourself for my benefit". And that's why we need unions.
Yeah, but if I could get 110% completion on a game achievement, I would.
The only people who ask for or give 110% are people who don’t understand 4th grade math.
That just means you just had no clue where 100% is.. not that 100% is not the top. If you could do 110% then your 100% was really only 90%.
when you’re not winning, just realize you could be. Use the win move
How much of an increase is it if I don't accept that 100% isn't the top?
Above 100% can make sense when you more than double something. But if you're using it as a scale then stick to the scale. You don't give 6 out of 5 stars. You don't rate an 11 on a scale of 1-10. Giving 110% violates the 1-100 scale Internet to percentages. If you have 1 of something and end up with 3 by the end then obviously you had a greater than 100% increase. But that's accounting for an increase above the expected amount. Hence why the scale was exceeded.