![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/acc5878c-ffa1-41a2-bd9b-1a341b1cb349.png)
The quality of the writing is questionable and the humor is juvenile, but there’s an okay story in there. I think it comes down to if you care for death games as a setting.
The quality of the writing is questionable and the humor is juvenile, but there’s an okay story in there. I think it comes down to if you care for death games as a setting.
None of this has a point. We’re talking over a shitpost rant about common use of math symbols. Even the conclusion boils down to it being a context dependent matter of preference. I’m just disagreeing that the original question as posed should be interpreted with weak juxtaposition.
My argument is specifically that using no separation shows intent for which way to interpret and should not default to weak juxtaposition.
Choosing not to use (6/2)(1+2) implies to me to use the only other interpretation.
There’s also the difference between 6/2(1+2) and 6/2*(1+2). I think the post has a point for the latter, but not the former.
Honestly, I do disagree that the question is ambiguous. The lack of parenthetical separation is itself a choice that informs order of operations. If the answer was meant to be 9, then the 6/2 would be isolated in parenthesis.
Yeah I agree with that. I will, however, point out that it means basically the same thing as the word normal. Context does matter as much as being understood as meaning non-autistic.
Lol, right? It would be funny if it weren’t so depressingly common a response.
“Something bad is happening to men”
“I think we should focus on how that affects women.”
Now it’s a Z:\bra