ani.social

pumpkinseedoil , to AnarchyChess in Oh no my rooks

I'm out of the loop, what's the joke? En passant it with your queen?

Toes OP ,
@Toes@ani.social avatar

It looks like a devastating move but white can win by force here.

Ludrol ,
@Ludrol@szmer.info avatar

That's not anarchychess that's just regular chess

kriz ,

Sometimes anarchy is boring!

Bristlecone , to 196 in Two Options, Same Rule

Centrist bullshit, the right loves this kind of shit

kzhe ,

Not really. Most who hold this view are far left.

TotallynotJessica ,
@TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world avatar

It's still a stupid view based on frustration with the establishment rather than reality. Emotions being valid doesn't make a falsehood more correct. Republicans have never been worse and Democrats are better than they've been in decades.

The only coherent argument behind not voting for Biden is accelerationism. It's a morally bankrupt strategy that's unlikely to work, but at least it's a long term plan that thinks beyond cutting off your nose to spite your face.

pedalmore ,

How is accelerationism a "long term plan that thinks beyond cutting off your nose to spite your face"? There's no long term plan at all, it's simply a false hope that people will rise up when things get shitty enough, and from those ashes some kind of utopia will sprout. That's not a plan at all, that's just a dream.

mindbleach , to 196 in Glitch in the matrix

Different compilers have robbed me of all trust in order-of-operations. If there's any possibility of ambiguity - it's going in parentheses. If something's fucky and I can't tell where, well, better parenthesize my equations, just in case.

Crozekiel ,

This is the way. It's an intentionally ambiguously written problem to cause this issue depending on how and where you learned order of operations to cause a fight.

SmartmanApps ,
@SmartmanApps@programming.dev avatar

intentionally ambiguously written

learned order of operations to cause a fight

The order of operations are the same everywhere. The fights arise from people who don't remember them.

Crozekiel ,

Please see this section of Wikipedia on the order of operations.

The "math" itself might not be ambiguous, but how we write it down absolutely can be. This is why you don't see actual mathematicians arguing over which one of these calculators is correct - it is not either calculator being wrong, it is a poorly constructed equation.

As for order of operations, they are "meant to be" the same everywhere, but they are taught differently. US - PEMDAS vs UK - BODMAS (notice division and multiplication swapped places). Now, they will say they are both given equal priority, but you can't actually do all of the multiplication and division at one time. Some are taught to simply work left to right, while others are taught to do multiplication first; but we are all taught to use parentheses correctly to eliminate ambiguity.

SmartmanApps ,
@SmartmanApps@programming.dev avatar

Please see this section of Wikipedia on the order of operations

That section is about multiplication, and there isn't any multiplication in this expression.

The “math” itself might not be ambiguous, but how we write it down absolutely can be

Not in this case it isn't. It has been written in a way which obeys all the rules of Maths.

This is why you don’t see actual mathematicians arguing over which one of these calculators is correct

But I do! I see University lecturers - who have forgotten their high school Maths rules (which is where this topic is taught) - arguing about it.

it is not either calculator being wrong

Yes, it is. The app written by the programmer is ignoring The Distributive Law (most likely because the programmer has forgotten it and not bothered to check his Maths is correct first).

US - PEMDAS vs UK - BODMAS

Those aren't the rules. They are mnemonics to help you remember the rules

notice division and multiplication swapped places

Yes, that's right, because they have equal precedence and it literally doesn't matter which way around you do them.

you can’t actually do all of the multiplication and division at one time

Yes, you can!

Some are taught to simply work left to right

Yes, that's because that's the easy way to obey the actual rule of Left associativity.

we are all taught to use parentheses correctly to eliminate ambiguity

Correct! So 2(2+2) unambiguously has to be done before the division.

Crozekiel ,

Just out of curiosity, what is the first 2 doing in "2(2+2)"...? What are you doing with it? Possibly multiplying it with something else?

there isn’t any multiplication in this expression.

Interesting.

I really hope you aren't actually a math teacher, because I feel bad for your students being taught so poorly by someone that barely has a middle school understanding of math. And for the record, I doubt anyone is going to accept links to your blog as proof that you are correct.

linuxdweeb ,

This is best practice since there is no standard order of operations across languages. It's an easy place for bugs to sneak in, and it takes a non-insignificant amount of time to debug.

Limitless_screaming , to 196 in Glitch in the matrix
@Limitless_screaming@kbin.social avatar

I don't think you encounter this one very often, but the technically correct -2^2 = -4 has a higher chance of ruining your day.

onion ,

You mean x^2 =4 where x=±2

Limitless_screaming ,
@Limitless_screaming@kbin.social avatar

No, you'd expect that -2^2 would equal 4, but calculators solve it as -(2)^2 not (-2)^2. But the case you mentioned is also pretty common.

ReveredOxygen ,
@ReveredOxygen@sh.itjust.works avatar

if you've touched polynomials ever, you'd expect the exponent to be before the negation. If you write x³-x² you don't mean x³ + (-x)² = x³+x², you mean x³-(x²)

Zellith , to 196 in Glitch in the matrix

watches the people with basic math skills fight to the death over the answer

starman2112 ,
@starman2112@sh.itjust.works avatar

If you really wanna see a bloodbath, watch this:

You know that a couple has two children. You go to the couple's house and one of their children, a young boy, opens the door. What is the probability that the couple's other child is a girl?

amtwon ,
@amtwon@lemmy.world avatar

50%, since the coins are independent, right?

starman2112 ,
@starman2112@sh.itjust.works avatar

Oops, I changed it to a more unintuitive one right after you replied! In my original comment, I said "you flip two coins, and you only know that at least one of them landed on heads. What is the probability that both landed on heads?"

And... No! Conditional probability strikes again! When you flipped those coins, the four possible outcomes were TT, TH, HT, HH

When you found out that at least one coin landed on heads, all you did was rule out TT. Now the possibilities are HT, TH, and HH. There's actually only a 1/3 chance that both are heads! If I had specified that one particular coin landed on heads, then it would be 50%

Pavidus , to 196 in Glitch in the matrix

There's quite a few calculators that get this wrong. In college, I found out that Casio calculators do things the right way, are affordable, and readily available. I stuck with it through the rest of my classes.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • kbinchat
  • All magazines