A bidet, you should buy a bidet.
I have wondered what the math of a bidet is. Decent ones cost a few hundred bucks. When does the TP saving win out? How long do bidets last?
The feeling of a freshly-washed anus is priceless
i want that on my epitaph
There are cheap ones that just connect to the water line between your toilet and the tank and they’re like 20 bucks and they’ll last you a couple years.
It takes a little getting used to the cold water spray, but I mean if you’re that desperate that you’re calculating the 30 cent difference per roll, then it might be worth the investment.
I’ve had mine since 2020 and it cost like $40.
Zero frills. Still $40 apparently.
Personally I started using like. 75% less TP once I got a bidet. Combined with spending $30 on the bidet itself, that’s easy savings.
You can get a cheap one for like $25-50 and install it yourself (pretty easy, not actual plumbing, just screwing and unscrewing a few things) and they’re fine. The more expensive ones have heated water, but you don’t need that. I eventually sprang for a “nicer” one, but now I feel that was unnecessary. Maybe I’m a freak, but I prefer the cold water anyway.
Honestly bidets are super fancy but you could just go with a “bum gun.” Little gentle water sprayer you attach to your toilet line and voila. Got mine for like $20-$30 or something.
Quite incredible. So much that I’m miffed this isn’t a standard expected thing on toilets.
Used bottle with water.
I know this is a meme, but for the record math is one of the things LLMs are famously worst at
Can confirm; I teach statistics and allow take home exams. I don’t even really need guardrails on the math-- if you cheat via LLM, your answer is almost always hilariously wrong.
were before they started just writing a mini-python script for every calculation and executing that.
I just got into a little spat with my friends fiance because she intellectually offloads with AI.
I stand by it.
The number of people I know who now ask AI instead of web searching is… very upsetting.
If you search Google just serves you their AI shit. The other day their AI told me the word “rainy” has 4 letters.
It’s does have 4 letters. It has 5 letters too.
It does. It also has 5 letters but 4 is technically correct
Google search has got so bad in the last couple of years that I actually don’t blame people for using AI for this.
Theres actually a secret third option
going offline to live in a hut in the forest?
Close, use not google
Yesterday I googled: Hardware store “City Name”. It only returned stores from a different city. So I googled: Hardware store “City Name City Name City Name” and it returned a single one for every result
Poop at work, get paid while pooping and use free tp.
Their tp is all scratchy and thin though…
Fold it 35 times
And now you have 35 papercuts and shit on your hand
And the toilet’s clogged. Now where are you gonna hide away and procrastinate?
Incorrect, I would rather die before asking Chat GPT anything
You ovation is loading, please stand by…
Would you actually rather die? That seems likely to be an exaggeration but I don’t know you.
Two ply 70¢ / (330/2) = 0.42 ¢
Three ply 120¢ / 300 = 0.4 ¢
Basically the same.
You meant 3 not one but I get you.
You’d think we would buy a bidet
Corrected thanks.
You guys don’t have unit pricing? In Australia it’s required by law that supermarkets show price per standard unit of measurement so you can easily compare
I don’t think unit counts account for what ply the toilet paper is.
I always check that but have found a couple instances where the math did not work out. Either it was wrong on purpose or by accident
yeah we have the same in europe for e.g. potato salad (price has to be listed per box and per kg) but that doesn’t apply to toilet paper i think … not a food item.
This actually isn’t too hard to solve. Double the value of each option by removing the folding requirement from the 2-ply and halving the price of the 3-ply to get an even comparison of 2-ply (330 sheets for $0.70) and 3-ply (300 sheets for $0.60), then recognize that it’s not worth adding 1/6 the price for 1/10th the sheets, to see that the 3-ply option is better.
Not folding 3-ply is asking for added expenses in the form of water and soap though… Push right through em
The ply count doesn’t reflect thickness or softness at all. Of the 3-ply toilet papers I’ve used at home, some need three layers to not fall apart on the first wipe, others are fine with a single sheet.
It hurts my brain to do it that way.
300 sheets for 1.2 is a nice division by .6: 500 sheets for $2. So now all we gotta do is multiply by .7 to get 350 sheets for 1.40.
Considering the fold, we are at 330 effective sheets for 1.40. 350 > 330, get the 3 ply (lol).
This is a little bit funky obviously and just works because of seeing a divisor. If not for that I would have tried once each way to get cost per full effective sheet or cost per half effective sheet to see which one has nicer numbers.
… Or just open the calculator app.
I’ve had the calculator open for 15 minutes but nothing is happening, is it broken? Help?
A nice division by 0.6
Funny how brains can work so differently lol
“You’ve spent 3x the theoretical savings asking me this question”
Over what time period though?
That comes out to 0.004242 per doubled-up 2-ply sheet vs 0.004 per 3-ply sheet
I shit and shower at work, not simultaneously though
Tap for spoiler
most of the time
Gotta stomp those spicy nuggets away. Then wash your shit-caked feet.
This man showershits
Better to shower shit than shit showers.
Edit: fuck, I should have said “better to shit in the shower than shower in the shit”, that would have been way better.
It’s not too late to edit it, I haven’t read it yet
Butt sprayer ftw
Water just use water you noobs. Didn’t gtp tell you?
Llms will discourage bidet usage so they can use the water instead
If chatgpt knows about something is about water usage.
I use less of the single ply than the double ply. I think I make it 1.5 ply thick, or something. Anyway, I don’t want a bidet, you guys have fun with that.
Kids today with their 3-ply ass napkin options.
