subignition

Don’t you have some kid’s birthday party to be at, you fucking clown?

To add to this, a new type of brain cell was discovered just last year. (I would have linked directly to the study but there was a server error when I followed the cite.)

I was gonna make a dark joke about a silver lining, but I don’t think losing Starlink would be worth losing GPS.

this is a really good dad joke, on first read it went completely over my head

I think I’m gonna trust someone from Harvard over your as-seen-on-TV looking ass account, but thanks for the entertainment you’ve provided by trying to argue with some of the actual mathematicians in here

I hardly dream so I guess I would say “it’s a dream when I wake up afterwards”

https://youtu.be/qd2hX721Wjg

For accuracy, it should be updated to read “Snitches will need stitches.”

… :(

I still remember staring into that giant ball of plasma and thinking it was the coolest thing I’d ever seen in a video game.

It’s an absolute tragedy we never got a half-life 3.

I believe they said “eat the rich”

A handcar!

And I bet the characters they’re playing are too.

A ginormous smidgen. A massive skosh. An anemic plenitude.

Toss a coin, to your admins…

I appreciate your optimism.
You can lead a horse to text, but you can’t make him read

Go home Tucker, you’re drunk.

[…] the question is ambiguous. There is no right or wrong if there are different conflicting rules. The only ones who claim that there is one rule are the ones which are wrong!

https://people.math.harvard.edu/~knill/pedagogy/ambiguity/index.html

As youngsters, math students are drilled in a particular
convention for the “order of operations,” which dictates the order thus:
parentheses, exponents, multiplication and division (to be treated
on equal footing, with ties broken by working from left to right), and
addition and subtraction (likewise of equal priority, with ties similarly
broken). Strict adherence to this elementary PEMDAS convention, I argued,
leads to only one answer: 16.

Nonetheless, many readers (including my editor), equally adherent to what
they regarded as the standard order of operations, strenuously insisted
the right answer was 1. What was going on? After reading through the
many comments on the article, I realized most of these respondents were
using a different (and more sophisticated) convention than the elementary
PEMDAS convention I had described in the article.

In this more sophisticated convention, which is often used in
algebra, implicit multiplication is given higher priority than explicit
multiplication or explicit division, in which those operations are written
explicitly with symbols like x * / or ÷. Under this more sophisticated
convention, the implicit multiplication in 2(2 + 2) is given higher
priority than the explicit division in 8÷2(2 + 2). In other words,
2(2+2) should be evaluated first. Doing so yields 8÷2(2 + 2) = 8÷8 = 1.
By the same rule, many commenters argued that the expression 8 ÷ 2(4)
was not synonymous with 8÷2x4, because the parentheses demanded immediate
resolution, thus giving 8÷8 = 1 again.

This convention is very reasonable, and I agree that the answer is 1
if we adhere to it. But it is not universally adopted.

Good rambling, would read again, 8/10

Pretty sure rubbing alcohol isn’t dangerous to the data layer, I think it just damaged the printed label

Well most replies already suggested a LLM but good old fashioned search skills work fine too.

For simple questions, as long as you know the correct terminology that is relevant, just asking the question of a search engine is usually good enough to turn up articles or stack overflow answers that’ll help

If you don’t know the terminology or you struggle to ask a precise question despite your knowledge, going up one level , so to speak, and consuming more information about the stuff in the immediate context, can often either fill in the gaps to allow you to ask the right question, or sometimes it’s the missing bit of info you didn’t know you needed to solve your actual problem.