Rubenerd’s Law of Food


My post yesterday about the health benefits of decaf coffee reminded me of this new law I’ve been mulling.

Back in 2017 I proposed Rubenerd’s Law of Headlines, a play on Betteridge’s which states that the answer to a headline ending with a question mark is no. I proposed that if an article is titled with “Technology foo considered harmful”, there’s an unharmful, legitimate use for it.

I’m now shamelessly extending Newton’s Third Law of Motion, and Cunningham’s Law which states that the best way to get to the correct answer on the Internet isn’t to ask a question, but to post the wrong answer.

Any comment about substitute or mock food will result in equal and opposite obtuseness.

Examples include “I don’t understand the point of decaf coffee, non-alcoholic beer, fake meat”, etc. What they’re really saying is “I can’t relate to anyone’s circumstances beyond my own”. Or they can, but feign ignorance for Internet points.

Author bio and support


Ruben Schade is a technical writer and infrastructure architect in Sydney, Australia who refers to himself in the third person. Hi!

The site is powered by Hugo, FreeBSD, and OpenZFS on OrionVM, everyone’s favourite bespoke cloud infrastructure provider.

If you found this post helpful or entertaining, you can shout me a coffee or send a comment. Thanks ☺️.