You state that the ambiguity comes from the implicit multiplication and not the use of the obelus.
I.e. That 6 ÷ 2 x 3 is not ambiguous
What is your source for your statement that there is an accepted convention for the priority of the iinline obelus or solidus symbol?
As far as I’m aware, every style guide states that a fraction bar (preferably) or parentheses should be used to resolve the ambiguity when there are additional operators to the right of a solidus, and that an obelus should never be used.
Which therefore would make it the division expressed with an obelus that creates the ambiguity, and not the implicit multiplication.
In this case it’s actually the absence of sources. I couldn’t find a single credible source that states that ÷ has somehow a different operator priority than / or that :
The only things there are a lot of are social media comments claiming that without any source.
My guess is that this comes from a misunderstanding that the obelus sign is forbidden in a lot of standards. But that’s because it can be confused with other symbols and operations and not because the order of operations is somehow unclear.
What is your source for the priority of the / operator?
i.e. why do you say 6 / 2 * 3 is unambiguous?
Every source I’ve seen states that multiplication and division are equal priority operations. And one should clarify, either with a fraction bar (preferably) or parentheses if the order would make a difference.
Same priority operations are solved from left to right. There is not a single credible calculator that would evaluate “6 / 2 * 3” to anything else but 9.
But I challenge you to show me a calculator that says otherwise. In the blog are about 2 or 3 dozend calculators referenced by name all of them say the same thing. Instead of a calculator you can also name a single expert in the field who would say that 6 / 2 * 3 is anything but 9.
Special care is needed when interpreting the meaning of a solidus in in-line math because of the notational ambiguity in expressions such as a/bc. Whereas in many textbooks, “a/bc” is intended to denote a/(bc), taken literally or evaluated in a symbolic mathematics languages such as the Wolfram Language, it means (a/b)×c. For clarity, parentheses should therefore always be used when delineating compound denominators.
I’m having the same issue. I thought I had food poisoning because I have chills, stomach cramps, and constipation. But the only culprit would be the three cups of raw broccoli I had on NYE.
It’s also clearly not a bug as some people suggest. Bugs are – by definition – unintended behavior.
There are plenty of bugs that are well documented. I can’t tell you the number of times that I’ve seen someone do something wrong, that they think is 100% right, and “carefully” document it. Then someone finds an edge case and points out the defined behavior has a bug, because the human forgot to account for something.
The other thing I’d point out that I didn’t see in your blog is that I’ve seen many many people say they need to evaluate the 2(3) portion first because “parenthesis”. No matter how many times I explain that this is a notation for multiplication, they try to claim it doesn’t matter because parenthesis. screams into the void
The fact of the matter is that any competent person that has to write out one of these equations will do so in a way that leaves no ambiguity. These viral math posts are just designed to insert ambiguity where it shouldn’t be, and prey on people who can’t remember middle school math.
Regarding your first part in general true, but in this case the sheer amount of calculators for both conventions show that this is indeed intended behavior.
Regarding your second point I tried to address that in the “distributive property” section, maybe I need to rewrite it a bit to be more clear.
Then they tell you the previous person was incompetent or something to try and make it seem like they were a bad employee, not that it’s a bad work environment.
“Oh? And who was in charge of their interview?” because unless they have a large hr department to handle hiring interviews, it was probably the person who hired you.
This is when you take notes in your notebook you should have brought with you.
I’ve noticed interviewers get visibly uncomfortable when I write in my notebook. It’s like they’re either trying to figure out if they just lied about something I will be able to reference later, or they just get that natural “someone is writing about me and I can’t read what it is” feeling, I assume the former.
Simon Pegg wasn’t lying in Hot Fuzz. The notebook is a powerful weapon if used right.
I thought that once too and ignored my gut feeling. It was the most toxic work environment that I've ever experienced, and it essentially killed my software development career. I was eventually laid off and never recovered. I'm now a mail carrier.
I actually work for Canada Post. We've heard rumblings of the pre-sequenced mail coming our way, and some people have lost large chunks of money from it. Contract negotiations are coming up though, so we'll see how things go. Though it is nice having a union that is willing to fight the company for the workers...I've never had that before this job.
Had a similar experience. Toxic company that was awarded a contract hired in a bunch of people, gave us starting dates then a week before we were supposed to start they delayed our start data by 4 months. It only got worse and worse from there. I eventually quit when I was doing 4 other jobs, like with different pay scales and supervisors and everything, by myself. Killed any chances I had with IT since every other company around here doesn’t want to risk yet another burnout from that place. I had the same place interview me twice 6 months apart and both times as soon as they saw that company on my resume they frowned and kind of cut it short.
Actually, I’ve had more than one interviewer comment on it saying it “shows (I’m) prepared” since many people don’t bring anything to write on and sometimes have to ask for a paper.
As for whether that could be a bonus in getting hired? Meh. 110% depends on the field.
If the question is “will asking unnecessary questions and writing down answers help get this job” then I’d ask if the interviewer isn’t prepared for a couple innocuous questions, then it shows a severe lack of preparedness on their part and I’d question whether I want to work for a place where someone gets shook by their underlings daring to question them.
I fully admit I am already biased against nearly any company that I would be interviewing at, so I’m already more willing to get confrontational in interviews if I feel I am not getting the respect I deserve (you know, the basic human decency of treating every random person you meet as an equal until they prove otherwise worthy), and drop them to keep looking than the average person. I’ll eat ramen and peanut butter sandwiches for a few more weeks if I need to. I’ve walked out of interviews before.
I’ve walked out after the opening “greeting”. “alright let’s make this quick, I’ve got a dozen other interviews today” okay well if that’s how you treat someone here for a simple interview I can’t imagine how you treat your employees on a bad day, get fucked. I literally said “excuse me? You don’t talk that way in a professional setting.” and left.
This is absolutely true. My former employer (a big box retail company) reduced my pay while I was on holiday. I had been there for years and accrued a bunch of pay rises - but the company got bought out and the new owners thought they could strip me of these because they felt they were temporary and non-contractual.
I got some legal advice that basically said they can’t do that sort of thing and had a meeting scheduled with HR. I went in with my notepad, I stayed calm - pleasent even - no angry shouting or slamming tables with fists, I just politely asked them questions and wrote down everything they said, then read their answers back to them to confirm thats what they said. I had about 6 questions prepared and by the 4th they were visibly uncomfortable, it was an amazing feeling making them squirm like that. After I got done asking my questions, I dropped the legal advice I had been given on them and it was obvious the answers they gave supported my case very heavily. They panicked and reversed all there decesion plus I got back-pay.
But if the first thing I had done is charge in making accusations and quoting the law I know nothing constructive would have happened.
See the goal is to bury them in their own words.
Edit: predictably the company went bust the next year. So long Office Outlet!
Always get them to bury themselves before dropping your intentions.
My wife is currently dealing with her employer and their complete lack of handicap spots, despite over 200 regular car spaces scattered all around a warehouse lot. She doesn’t quite get how to “play the game” like this but she’s learning.
One party recording state so I’d like her to go in to talk about it while recording, but her anxiety is completely stonewalling her from bringing it up.
Hit record on the phone, slip it in a pocket that has good clearance for the whole conversation, and get them to say the things they’ve said when they think nobody else can hear them.
Apparently the front office woman screamed at her to move her car (she parked there because the offices are isolated from traffic and have access to her work area)and “it’s not our goddamn problem we don’t have handicap spots, it’s yours so deal with it”
I’m about to just skip around waiting for her to do things and file a complaint with the EEOC or at least the ADA government site complaint form. I’m sure that would take months, if not years before anything ever happened, but I can’t hold her hand and be there when she confronts the owners about their 6-8 missing handicap spots.
memes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.