Tlaloc_Temporal

ViaBedrock would be cool if it at least allowed building. World archival is neat though.

I doubt I’d be banned on my friend’s personal realm, unless microsoft have automatic anti-cheat running even there.

With the sole exception of playing on a bedrock server. I’ve looked for Java mods to facilitate this, but only found the reverse (understandably).

There have been many an issue with YT changing notification settings, or even unsubscribing people. I don’t know if they still do that, but it used to happen to enough people at once that channels would mention checking your notification settings after seeing double digit percentage drops in base viewership.

The best and brightest put them there because it made them more money. This problem won’t go away until the system is changed.

The original Greek “-ikos” was both the feminine singular when refering to “the art” (the whole field), and the neuter plural when refering to “things pertaining to the art”. Latin took just the feminine singular, and most Latin-based languages today still use a singular, including English terms older than 1500 or so, like chemistry rather than chemics, taxonomy v. taxonomics, or arithmetic as opposed to arithmetics‽

Later in the Renaissance, people remembered Greek existed, and decided to try and bring back the neuter plural by taking a perfectly good -ic and slapping an s on it. Thus we get the somewhat newer sciences of physics, mathematics, ballistics, demographics, statistics, and so on.

The shortening of mathematics to “math” and “maths” was done much later, around 1900, give or take a few decades. Both versions can be found as purely written contractions beforehand, but their use in speech and whether the s was thruncated appears random.

Thus, if you must use a plural, the original useage has singular for the field (“Biomechanics is a difficult subject.”), and plural for things relating to the field (“The mathematics used are difficult to parse.”); don’t try to justify using several thousand year old grammar (from a region remote enough that we forgot about it for several centuries) with syntax rules not present in the original. English is plenty fucked up as it is, let it build it’s own syntax and heal a bit, eh?

That’s an after the fact justification.

It’s ambiguous because it works both ways, not because we don’t have a standard.

Try reading the whole sentence. There is a standard, I’m not claiming there isn’t. Confusion exists because operating against the standard doesn’t immediately break everything like ignoring brackets would.

Just to make sure we’re on the same page (because different clients render text differently, more ambiguous standards…), what does this text say?

2³4

It should say 2^3^4; “Two to the power of three to the power of four”. The proper answer is 2⁸¹, but many math interpreters (including Excel, MATLAB, and many students) will instead compute 8⁴, which is quite different.

We have a standard because it’s ambiguous. If there was only one way to do it, we’d just do that, no standard needed. You’d need to go pretty deep into kettle math or group theory to find atypical addition for example.

2³4 is ambiguous. 2⁽³4) is standard practice, but some calculators aren’t that smart and will do (2³⁾4.

It’s ambiguous because it works both ways, not because we don’t have a standard. Confusion is possible.

It’s not very active or professed if you do it privately with existing tools.

I kinda wish reposts were an actual mechanic, where it’s linked to the original like a crossost. Meme variant chains would be cool too, seeing the evolution from the first post.

This post is already a day old, and the imaged was at least 8h before that.

If that’s what a “talk” to plants drink does, I’d love to get a “talk” to humans drink. Imagine the psychology experiments I could set up if I could understand the subconscious pheromone, posture, subvocal, and other various poorly understood methods of communication!

Horsepower isn’t a measure of how much power one horse can produce at any time, but rather over an entire day. It’s roughly the number of horses an engine could replace running 24/7.

Running a horse at 15 horsepower would tire it out rather quickly, so you’d need many teams of horses rotated around to maintain 15 horsepower.

Hey!

Why DC? The whole advantage of AC was efficient transmission! (And AC motors)

Tying shoelaces together, except you only chamge shoes once a year.

I agree it needs to be more clearly defined, but one of the reasons it wasn’t clearly defined was because mathematicians thought it was so universal it didn’t need defining, like how parentheses work to begin with.

Casio tried not doing umplicit multiplication after some american teachers complained, then went back to doing it after everyone else complained. Implicit multiplication is the standard.

Exponents are second, parentheses/brackets are always first. What order you do your exponents in is another ambiguity though.

Can’t catch a cold of you’re dead!

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

My one big criticism of the Ti-83/84 is implicit multiplication. Ti says 1/2x is 0.5x when I needed the reciprocal of 2x.