this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2025
139 points (100.0% liked)

Slop.

453 readers
561 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/gossip

founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 22 points 6 days ago (2 children)

honestly considering how many people get this wrong I don't blame greg. I got this wrong until I got ranted at by a math wizz in uni, who I do thank. Shit's unintuitive!

[–] ChaosMaterialist@hexbear.net 24 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It makes much more sense when converted into fractions and multiply, where you have 9/10 and 11/10 respectively. Using percentages outside of a fixed reference causes all the confusion.

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 16 points 6 days ago (2 children)

optimistic to expect your average peon, including me, to turn percentages into fractions in their mind

[–] aebletrae@hexbear.net 12 points 6 days ago (2 children)

But, but... percentages are already fractions. Per cent = "out of a hundred".

The % symbol even looks like a fraction to remind everyone.

Now, simplifying fractions from 90/100 to 9/10—in spite of it literally being removing a zero from each side—does seem to cause some real problems.

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

where you have 9/10 and 11/10 respectively

This is the one that is not intuitive

[–] aebletrae@hexbear.net 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

How are you at thinking about years, decades, and centuries?

If we take it step by step:—

  • 10 years of a century is ten years out of a hundred.
  • 10% is ten out of a hundred.
  • So 10 years is 10% of a century.

 

Looking at the same thing another way:—

  • 10 years is a also a decade.
  • There are 10 decades in a century.
  • So one decade is one tenth (1/10) of a century.

 

Bringing in the comparison from earlier:—

  • 90% of a century is 90 years, or 9 decades.
  • 9 decades is nine tenths (9/10) of a century.
  • 110% of a century is 110 years, or 11 decades.
  • 11 decades is eleven tenths (11/10) of a century.

 

Are these familiar enough to make sense as a parallel, or just further irrelevant confusion?

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 5 points 6 days ago

How are you at thinking about years, decades, and centuries?

not a lot, usually

It's not like I don't get the train of thought here, it just doesn't come intuitive

[–] ChaosMaterialist@hexbear.net 4 points 6 days ago

But, but... percentages are already fractions. Per cent = "out of a hundred".

You are correct. It's more like leaving off the Unit from a number, with that causing an incorrect conversion somewhere else.

[–] Nakoichi@hexbear.net 10 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I finally learned to convert fractions and imperial vs metric by selling drugs and working retail lol.

For example I can tell you that one OZ = ~~0.625~~ 0.0625* LB off the dome but don't ask me to do calculus.

[–] aebletrae@hexbear.net 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

one OZ = 0.625 LB

I think you're missing a zero, or have transposed the zero and decimal point. You need 16 oz for 1 lb, right? Or did you just give your customers really good deals?

[–] Nakoichi@hexbear.net 5 points 6 days ago

lol yeah meant to be .06 my bad. Of course that kind of oversight you would quickly realize while weighing stuff out

[–] keepcarrot@hexbear.net 4 points 6 days ago

Oh, I never learned Oz to lb. Ounce just was some weird thing like 28 grams

[–] RNAi@hexbear.net 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] RNAi@hexbear.net 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

~~The krautian brainpan imposes an adaptative tradeoff where it restrict the development of sense of humor in exchange for being good at nerd stuff~~

Thought your primary and secondary schools are still good, like well funded and still not teaching creationist science and stuff like that.

Like, in my last year of public secondary school more than half my class somehow struggled with speed * time = distance, but eh teachers get paid shit what can you expect

Sure, people can have dislexia or just not be good nor motivated at math , but it was more than half the class

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 4 points 6 days ago

Thought your primary and secondary schools are still good, like well funded and still not teaching creationist science and stuff like that.

Well it's been a while. As far as memory serves all my math and physics teachers were pretty good. Just stopped clicking somewhen, I think I just got a terminal case of humanities brain.