ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content]

<< < (956/1162) > >>

IainB:
How come no-one commented on the image and comments re the calculation puzzle: 6-1*0+2/2=?
That one quite surprised me.
All you need to do to get the correct answer is pop it in to your calculator.
Unless it's an HP calculator, that is.   :-[

x16wda:
There could be two right answers depending on your assumptions - is operation precedence honored or do you want to go left to right? But in any case I am curious how you would get a 42 out of that... anyone?? Unless it's a HHGG reference of course. (No panic here.)

tomos:
I would stress that there was no intention on my part to "Go Basement" on this and tut-tut or foam at the mouth about police brutality, or similar - the fact that it was a cop who was the actor was kinda coincidental, and police brutality is a sorry fact of life for a minority of police officers and a problem for their commanders to address, and something to which we have by now probably become desensitised anyway - so I generally would be disinclined to make passing comment about specific cases of police brutality in this forum (I don't find it funny in and of itself anyway) or anywhere else - e.g., The Basement.

No, what I was posting about is what seems to be a relatively new/emerging and growing phenomenon that is occurring in our society and which is largely enabled by the advent of telecomms and/or computerised "social networks" (e.g., including live video streaming, Twitter, Facebook) combined with the possibilities of the smartphone or video camera and sometimes especially the selfie features therein, resulting in something new that seems to be at one and the same time so seriously vain, moronic and self-destructive in some way that it it beggars belief and it might actually be quite funny and deserving of mockery that a person would do that to themselves in the first place without apparently considering the potential consequences for themselves or how their behaviour might appear to others watching in critical judgement. To do that would seem to require a pathological conceit coupled with a complete absence of self-awareness.-IainB (October 08, 2015, 12:37 AM)
--- End quote ---

I got that possibility of humour there (especially in the arstechnica title), but the problem is that police have been getting away with exactly that for a long time now -- so on seeing a post like that, I would think unusual, rather than the way you suggest -- which is why I thought it was posted in the wrong thread.

Curt:
How come no-one commented on the image and comments re the calculation puzzle: 6-1*0+2/2=?-IainB (October 08, 2015, 01:22 AM)
--- End quote ---

^ one very good reason would be that we don't all read รท the same way. To me it is a minus, saying >6-1*0+2-2=?<, not >6-1*0+2/2=?<


IainB:
There could be two right answers depending on your assumptions - is operation precedence honored or do you want to go left to right? But in any case I am curious how you would get a 42 out of that... anyone?? Unless it's a HHGG reference of course. (No panic here.)
_______________________________
-x16wda (October 08, 2015, 05:37 AM)
--- End quote ---
Well, I figured it was just a stupid "teaser" puzzle - an elementary one that is deliberately ambiguous - to generate clicks to advisoruncle.com, which looks like a recruitment agency, or something. Thus getting the answer "right" was likely to be largely irrelevant, and so no particular answer will necessarily be "right".
The caption says "...ANSWER IT", presumably signifying that it is in an IT-related context, so I would presume that, for computation, the operation precedence rule would be followed - and any calculator would be able to confirm the same solution without needing brackets around the * and / operations. Oddly, the HP calculator might be an exception.

If you went step-by-step from L to R (which was what I did first, just to see) then 6-1*0+2/2= can give "1".
However, elementary maths and any calculator that is programmed to correctly obey the standard computational rules would give "7", so I reckoned that, from the context of IT, "7" would be the "correct" answer. Mind you, I didn't bother working it from R to L...   :huh:

You are probably right about the HHGG reference to 42, which I recall was the answer to "Life, The Universe, Everything", or words to that effect. I was never sure but I suspected that Douglas Adams chose 42 for the reason that not only is it the magic constant of the smallest magic cube, composed with numbers 1 to 27, but also (and perhaps more importantly) it is kind of - or part of - "the answer to everything", being the 5th Catalan number, which numbers occur especially in combinatorial problems, where the answers to many/most of them is the sequence of the Catalan numbers. But that's just a guess.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version