Newest at the top
| 2025-04-28 23:50:13 +0200 | tolgo | (~Thunderbi@199.115.144.130) |
| 2025-04-28 23:49:24 +0200 | <EvanR> | lol |
| 2025-04-28 23:49:14 +0200 | <davean> | I prefer my theories dynamic, not set. |
| 2025-04-28 23:49:02 +0200 | <EvanR> | how could you possibly know if the proof was right or wrong! |
| 2025-04-28 23:49:00 +0200 | prdak | (~Thunderbi@user/prdak) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-04-28 23:48:53 +0200 | <EvanR> | they didn't even have set theory |
| 2025-04-28 23:48:43 +0200 | <EvanR> | smh 19th century |
| 2025-04-28 23:48:00 +0200 | <darkling> | I always liked the history of Fermat's Last Problem. Was thought to be solved for 20 years, back in the 19th century, before someone spotted the mistake. |
| 2025-04-28 23:46:57 +0200 | <davean> | It wasn't actually a short list |
| 2025-04-28 23:46:48 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-04-28 23:46:46 +0200 | <davean> | I should dig that up |
| 2025-04-28 23:46:43 +0200 | <davean> | I once had a list of "Hard problems solved by accident people someone thought it should be easy" |
| 2025-04-28 23:46:28 +0200 | <darkling> | Hehe. I hope not. |
| 2025-04-28 23:46:02 +0200 | <davean> | darkling: Or it was and the prof just assumed it was wrong ;) |
| 2025-04-28 23:45:52 +0200 | <int-e> | yet |
| 2025-04-28 23:45:27 +0200 | <darkling> | Yeah. The Riemann Hypothesis hasn't been one of those yet, though. :) |
| 2025-04-28 23:45:24 +0200 | <EvanR> | strategy |
| 2025-04-28 23:45:22 +0200 | <EvanR> | didn't know the question was supposed to be hard |
| 2025-04-28 23:45:18 +0200 | LainIwakura | (~LainIwaku@user/LainIwakura) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2025-04-28 23:44:57 +0200 | <davean> | There have been several cases of long standing math problems solved because undergrads thought they were supposed to be ab le to sovle it |
| 2025-04-28 23:44:50 +0200 | <darkling> | They weren't even marked, let alone credit-worthy. But several of that lecturer's questions qould lead to the follow-on question, "would you like a PhD?" |
| 2025-04-28 23:44:32 +0200 | <davean> | wouldn't be rthe first time a long standing math problem was solved by dint of being put on a college exam |
| 2025-04-28 23:44:16 +0200 | prdak | (~Thunderbi@user/prdak) prdak |
| 2025-04-28 23:44:01 +0200 | <davean> | darkling: eh there is partial credit for coming up with interesting intermediate results |
| 2025-04-28 23:43:17 +0200 | <darkling> | davean: We'd get problem sheets like that from our lecturers. One of the questions, once, was, literally, "prove the Riemann Hypothesis". Lecturer taking a hopeful punt... :) |
| 2025-04-28 23:42:17 +0200 | <darkling> | or, slightly less offensive, but still missing the point, "I spent a lot of time on it!" |
| 2025-04-28 23:42:09 +0200 | <davean> | My favorit exams where "Here are three things, you have a week to prove them" |
| 2025-04-28 23:41:49 +0200 | <darkling> | "I showed up! I should get marks for that!" |
| 2025-04-28 23:41:44 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-04-28 23:41:11 +0200 | <davean> | They're not even given connectives |
| 2025-04-28 23:41:08 +0200 | <monochrom> | I don't know. I guess if one has an entitlement attitude then one understands how this is unfair. |
| 2025-04-28 23:41:02 +0200 | <davean> | Those are statements, where is the logic though? |
| 2025-04-28 23:40:27 +0200 | <monochrom> | "Every question requires thinking. There are very little free marks. This is unfair." |
| 2025-04-28 23:39:15 +0200 | <int-e> | davean: it's easy if you don't think about it? :) |
| 2025-04-28 23:39:07 +0200 | <davean> | It would seem one based on memorization one might have an argument on because one could just look up facts. |
| 2025-04-28 23:38:40 +0200 | <davean> | monochrom: How does one complain they were deprived by an exam requiring thinking? |
| 2025-04-28 23:38:22 +0200 | gorignak | (~gorignak@user/gorignak) gorignak |
| 2025-04-28 23:36:29 +0200 | <darkling> | (They changed it all two years before I was born, but the coins were still in circulation). |
| 2025-04-28 23:35:54 +0200 | <darkling> | I remember using "5p" and "10p" coins that were marked "1 shilling" and "2 shillings". |
| 2025-04-28 23:34:57 +0200 | <darkling> | The pund remained the same. The shilling (12 old pence, 5 new) and two shilling coins were kept. Everything under a shilling was dropped, and a new coin (50p) minted for the 10 shilling point. |
| 2025-04-28 23:33:49 +0200 | <monochrom> | I say that because a lot of students are complaining that I am depriving them of their rightful marks because my exam required thinking. |
| 2025-04-28 23:32:51 +0200 | <EvanR> | ooooooo |
| 2025-04-28 23:32:25 +0200 | <monochrom> | A lot of people must have complaint that their rightful wealth were literally decimated. >:) |
| 2025-04-28 23:31:43 +0200 | <darkling> | (There's an entire plot thread in a couple of Trollope's books about that, 120 years before they actually did it). |
| 2025-04-28 23:31:43 +0200 | <EvanR> | use unary floating point |
| 2025-04-28 23:31:07 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2025-04-28 23:30:56 +0200 | <darkling> | For extra fun, consider pre-decimalisation British coinage (240 pence / pound; fractions down to 1/4p, so 960 farthings to the pound)... and then the transition to decimalised currency. :) |
| 2025-04-28 23:27:53 +0200 | <monochrom> | I don't know. But I start with: How do I express one half in unary? |
| 2025-04-28 23:27:02 +0200 | <davean> | monochrom: wouldn't unary be better? |
| 2025-04-28 23:26:11 +0200 | <c_wraith> | I suppose given that context, USD uses 1000ths of a dollar in order to make a ha'penny an actual value they can issue. |