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.
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.
If somebody called me a seppo, I wouldn’t be offended, I’d just think they were kind of dumb. It’s just too silly to take seriously as an insult.
Well, no. That’s a kind of coffee.
It’s also called Gaia, but Gaians sounds silly.
Lol, this is also wrong. Replace ape with primate and you’ve got something more accurate. If you actually care about maintaining phyletic groups then apes ( and thus humans) are old world monkeys.
I always click “Don’t recommend channel” when the thumbnail looks like this. I don’t know if it has improved recommendations at all, but I certainly don’t see it as often, which is nice.
That’s a weird take on this. Not liking or being good at small talk does not equate with disliking the person. It certainly doesn’t mean you “hate interacting with them”.
I use the same name for most things out of habit, but I wouldn’t be too put out if it is taken when signing up for something new.
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.