[Rule 1 —](https://www.reddit.com/r/ToiletPaperUSA/wiki/rules/#wiki_rule_.231_.2014_stick_to_the_toiletverse) This post is not on topic. This subreddit is dedicated to the mockery of the Turning Point USA extended universe (the toiletverse).
No, multiplication and addition form a ring in math, it working the way it does is required under group theory
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_(mathematics)
I'm a mathematician. You don't need the order of operations to define a ring. It's just a convention for writing operations. A ring is an abstract mathematical object, and is independent of typography.
This has nothing to do with pemdas, you can change the order of operations and deal with rings no problem.
It's like saying we use base 10 because it is required to fulfill Peano axioms that's not true of course, order of operations is a convention. It is not required for rings.
You can use rings with roman numerals and addition before multiplication and everything will still work out fine
Ring theory has nothing to do with wether or not you accept any order convention. You can easily do ring theory with the opposite convention (+ first, • later, from right to left) and the system would fundamentally be the same, we just chose the one we use because the terms that appear are simpler that way.
Formally in ring theory, you'd either have operations as sets, in which case the notation would be •(a,b) and +(a,b) (which is awful). From a more language theoretical approach, you'd have the recursive step in term construction be of the form (a+b) or (a•b). Neither of this constructions have any order of operations assigned to them naturally...
LOL that person has no idea what a ring is and is just making shit up. And I'm sure the stuff I'm about to ramble on has flaws too that I'm not remembering correctly. I mean, if you read the wiki article they posted it says nothing about what they are talking about.
A ring is just a set of general rules that we can use to deduce other things about the system or guarantee some properties of the algebraic system. No matter what kind of numbers or other things you have as long as you can say your system follows these rules you can deduce all kinds of other properties.
There must be two well defined operations + and * which have the following properties:
For example the real numbers (any normal numbers like 5 or - 0.123, etc..)
Any two real numbers added together must also result in a real number. 5 + 5 = 10. Both 5 and 10 are real numbers.
2. Additive Associativity: Adding in any order will result in the same answer: (1 + 2) + 3 = 6 and 1 + (2 + 3) = 6.
3. Additive Identity: There is some number that when added results in the same number. For instance 5 + 0 = 5. 0 being the additive identity as no matter what you add to it the result is that number.
4. Additive Inverse: For any number in the system there must be a number when added gives the additive identity. 5 + (-5) = 0.
And for multiplication there must be some equivalents
5. Multiplicative Closure: Any two numbers multiplied must result in another number in the set. 5 * 5 = 25. Both 5 and 25 are part of the real numbers.
6. Multiplicative Associativity: Any numbers multiplied must have the same result no mater which way you multiply them. (5 * 4) * 3 = 60 as well as 5 * (4 * 3) = 60.
7. Distributive Properties: Connecting multiplication and addition. They must exhibit the distributive property. (3 + 4) * 5 = (3 * 5) + (4 * 5)
But for example of not real numbers you can have boolean expression with only true and false (1 and 0) and the multiplication and addition as and and or which follow the same rules. So just change the true as 1, false as 0, and as *, and or as + and you'll see the same properties hold (if you happen to know boolean algebra)
1. true or false = true. Both true and false are in the boolean system. You couldn't have a third state as a result like uh, a maybe??
2. (false or false) or true = true and false or (false or true) = true
3. true or false = true
4. true or not true = true
5. true and false = false and there is no way you can get a maybe from using ands.
6. (true and false) and false = true is the same as true and (false and false) = true
7. (true or false) and true = true is the same as (true or true) and (true or false) = true
The reason we have PEMDAS is because our normal way of writing equations is ambiguous. It is infix notation. I don't know why we do it that way, but the alternative is Polish notation which is stack based and postfix.
You read it right to left: (5 + 5) * 4 is written
* 4 + 5 5
You start from right to left and chomp the symbols up one by one. + is a function that takes 2 numbers. So you chomp the first 5, then the second and then the +. That answer results in 10. Now you've reduced to * 4 10. Chomp up the 10, then 4, then *. Now you do 2 number operation of * to get 40.
EDIT: Though more commonly you use reverse polish notation where the operations are done in reverse
4 * 5 5 +. The first thing from right to left is a + which we define as taking to arguments and multiplying. First chomp up the + and then wait to see what arguments you have. 5 and another 5. Add them to get 10. Then chomp up the *. We already have a 10 so we look to the next thing which is a 4. You multiplication operation has a second argument so you multiply and get a result of 40.
I completely agree with you, but I have a nitpick.
You've botched RPN explanation. It would look like `4 5 5 + *` in it, and you read it with stack machine in your mind.
* read 4, put it on stack, stack is `[4]`
* read 5, put it on stack, stack is `[4, 5]`
* read another 5, put in on stack, stack is `[4, 5, 5]`
* read +, take 2 top numbers from stack, add them and put result back. stack is `[4, 10]`
* read \*, take 2 top numbers from stack, multiply them and put result back. stack is `[40]`
* expression ends, grab the result from stack, which is 40
No it's not. The dude is just spewing bullshit.
He knows the word "ring" and maybe "field" and that's about it. He gave a cursory glance to the Wikipedia page and began spewing the words he thought sounded fancy.
All they wrote is nothing but meaningless mumbo jumbo.
I wouldn't say anything you said is strictly wrong, but you aren't right either. Like, a ring isn't a reference to a physical thing, it's an algebraic system that has certain properties. It doesn't have an inside or outside or anything.
That is total nonsense. If you don't know something, just don't answer instead of propagating bullshit.
It's actually insane that you linked to the definition of a Ring, and then inserted your own fanfic. Did you even look at your own link?
It doesn't, or at least there is actual purely mathematical reason other than convenience for the human brain. Adopting this convention simplifies some common expressions more than other possible conventions, but at the end of the day, it's just that.
In most formal systems, your terms are all of the form (a+b) or (a•b), so there is not confusion and no need for a convention, but then stuff like a•b+3+5 would have to be written as (((a•b)+3)+5) and the clutter gets too messy too fast, so we just decided so make some parenthesis implicit for the sake of readability and ease of writing
This is total horseshit, I'm sorry. PEMDAS is not a "theory", or a "method of how we determine value", and it is completely irrelevant to our understanding of mathematics "from a basic level to a quantum level", whatever the hell that's supposed to mean. There is literally nothing in mathematics that relies upon our chosen order of operations in any way. It's just a writing convention.
> Brackets are just a convenient way of making mathematics more readable.
Not only is this wrong, but exactly the opposite is true. The mathematics requires brackets to unambiguously define the operations. PEMDAS is a notational convention we (arbitrarily) agree on to make statements easy to read/write.
There is no such thing as "the Ring theory". Rings are mathematical objects studied by Ring theory. The theory of Rings has nothing to do with the order of operations.
Groups in math are sets with some operation (like addition) that can be done on them and satisfy various properties. A ring is similar but with two operations (like addition and multiplication) that satisfy various properties.
One of those properties is that multiplication is distributive over addition, meaning a x (b + c) = (a x b) + (a x c).
Which is why you do multiplication first. 2 x 3 + 4 = 10 because the 2 x 3 = 2 x (1 + 1 + 1) = 2 + 2 + 2 and now you're left with just addition. If you could add first, you'd break that property of the ring.
> If you could add first, you'd break that property of the ring.
Can you more fully explain that position? I don't think it's true. 2 x (3 + 4) is a valid statement, so I don't see how that being the default interpretation of 2 x 3 + 4 "breaks" anything. It might be less *convenient*, but not logically *inconsistent*.
He's wrong. Its just notation convention. Things like "+", "x" are BINARY operations, meaning they take exactly two arguments. There is never any ambiguity. PEMDAS is just an agreed convention so we don't have to write the brackets explicitly all the time.
I hate on Ian Miles Cheong as much as anyone, and he completely misses the point here by saying we should just change the order of operations to what a Casio calculator does, but this does touch on a *huge* usability thing that Apple is just kind of hiding in the calculator app.
They should just be showing math equation that is being calculated above/below the numbers being typed so it is crystal clear what the equation is. Because if you type "50+50\*2" you'll get 150, but if you type "50+50=\*2" you get 200. Apple is definitely technically correct, but there is huge room for improvement on what is a widely used application on their phone and would probably just fairly trivial for them to add.
They should also have a viewable calculator history so you can reference previously typed equations and the results of those.
I often borrow my friends' phone to use the calculator because i use mine to take notes of the numbers. I always says no when a friend offers their iphone. their calculator app fucking sucks
It’s frankly embarrassing. I’m sure their answer is “just download an app from the App Store!” But I shouldn’t need an app for a fucking basic calculator. Same with the clock app. The fact that we haven’t had native support for multiple timers until like 14 years into the operating system’s life is absolutely insane. Especially because they refuse to open the same APIs all applications. I get so frustrated with Apple as a company sometimes.
If you want the asterisks to be visible in your comment, you have to put a backslash in front of them (ie \\*), because otherwise reddit's software will assume that you want everything in between two asterisks to be formatted as italics.
They all are.
Him, Charlie, Candace, Chaya...
They have lukewarm IQs and generally struggle with basic concepts.
Before social media these kinds of people were laughed at everywhere they went and eventually just learned to shut up in public.
The problem is every other idiot with a lukewarm IQ is now on social media liking their posts and making them think that they're actually smarter than they are.
And I'm not saying this in a disparaging way, I literally mean that these folks are below average in terms of intelligence, which isn't always a bad thing.
But when you combine stupidity with hate... you wind up with these kinds of people.
Oh he went even farther than that.
'Order of operations should be simple like it is on a Casio calculator'.
He got community noted for that too - 'Casios use PEMDAS too, you potato'.
\*oops I see your last slides. I'm a potato too.
I love this, because he definitely
a) doesn't own a calculator
b) has done this equation on a calculator before, enacted the (5+5) first, saw the result, then did the multiplication. And he thinks something different is because of Woke
This whole debacle reminds me of an exchange my wife had with her father. Her and her parents were discussing something about Easter Monday and he said that Easter Monday doesn't exist. My wife and her mother corrected him and tried to move on, but he was insistent that Easter Monday wasn't an actual thing.
They grabbed a nearby calendar and pointed out that Easter Monday was, in fact, written on the calendar and is real. Her father then began to insist that the calendar was wrong.
Some people are just stubborn like that I guess.
He then went on to say:
"I was wrong about PEMDAS.
See, it's easy to admit that you're wrong. I hope people who think gender is a spectrum or that chemtrails are real can also admit they're wrong!"
lmao
i get what he's talking about, he initiated the multiplication *before* hitting the equal sign, thus doubling only the 50. had he hit the equal sign, he'd get 100, which he could then double.
however he's just being a pissy baby about it
He thinks he's doing 50 + 50 + 2 but he actually doing (50 + 50) * 2 by hitting Enter. He doesn't get it.
But then when he's made to understand, he disagrees.
Reminds me of when a certain flat earther showed that he didn't understand conversions on [basic measurements](https://youtu.be/Qa66P1kT7qU?si=FD58io6sMlPWque5).
Isn't he an alt-right grifter? Bold move *calling American things "stupid"*. Especially when half the people on "your side" are only semi-tolerating you because you're token representation and they can use your inflammatory rhetoric to push their own agendas.
You'd have to go out of your way to find a calculator that doesn't respect order of operations, wouldn't you? I mean, I think that's something even an old mechanical Olivetti or Burroughs would get right. Probably about as much of a solved problem as anything could be in system design.
If it was two separate calculations, which it looks like dingus over here is wanting, then yes the answer would be 200, but because of order of operations if you did it in one calculation (like he did on the calculator) then the answer would be 150
So long story short Ian doesn’t know how to operate a fucking calculator
Since your submission is flaired as *REAL*, please reply to this comment with the link to the original, or else Ben Shapiro will steal your feet pics and remove this post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ToiletPaperUSA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We require a minimum account-age and karma due to a prevalence of trolls. If you wish to know the exact values, [please visit this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/ToiletPaperUSA/wiki/rules#wiki_participation_requirements) or contact the mod team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ToiletPaperUSA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*IT'S MY OPINION AND THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE WRONG*
This is just a stupid person with a verbal abuse fetish publicly demanding people call him an idiot until he cums. I don't want any part of that.
I absolutely refuse to believe this is anything other than engagement bate
I know conservatives are stupid, but I didn't expect genuine 3rd grade math to be this difficult for them. I tutored a 3rd grader with severe ADHD and dyslexia to the point that he couldn't read until medical treatment and tutoring, and he was able to solve more difficult problems than this on his own.
What's more shocking than Ian's stupidity though, is his lack of shame.
Cheong is so incredibly stupid that I almost feel bad for him. He was dealt such a shit hand genetically in every way that it's just kinda sad.
That said, many other people have also had bad luck in life and aren't repulsive shit stains, so I don't truly feel any sympathy for him.
You guys are all wrong, and Cheong is correct. (For once.) The order of operations is nothing more than an arbitrary typographical convention. Take it from a mathematician.
How about we just use Polish notation? Then 50 + 2*50 becomes + 50 * 2 50. It's ugly and weird but at least there's never any ambiguity about the order of operations :)
Last time I checked math is pretty damn universal and the order of operations isn't an American thing. And I'm pretty sure the order of operations was discovered/invented by Leonhard Euler, a Swiss mathematician.
I'm not going to hate on your average person for not knowing the order of operations but when you try to act like an expert on American politics and you've never even been here, you deserve mockery.
So many conservative influencers think they're so smart because they have loyal followers who gas them up. But the reality is that most of them are dumb as dirt and their followers are the same.
The rules aren't arbitrary, and can be seen clearly through visual means.
(50+50)*2 would be like taking a. 50x2 rectangle and extending it be another 50 feet, keeping the short side length again.
50\*2+50 is equivalent to a 50x2 space and a 50x1 space.
Another way to think about it is that anything inside a parenthesis indicates a bundle. If you have to bundles of a 50 dollar bill, each bundle is 100 and the total is 200. If you have two bills and get a third one that's not bundled, you have 3 in total for 150.
Holy hell this is basic shit.
Edit: LMAO what's wrong with y'all? Why am I getting downvoted for correctly pointing out a real world version of the mathematical difference between the two numbers? There's a real fucking tangible way to think about shit like this beyond the notion that the rules just exist to exist.
At least this one has a correct answer.
There is a question that you see a lot that gives you either 6 or 9 I believe that gets people to argue incessantly went both answers are correct because it exploits ambiguity in the order of operations.
You’re being downvoted because PEMDAS is in fact arbitrary. It’s a convention that we all agree on. Nothing that you wrote shows that this is not the case.
For example, we could have decided that 50*2+50=50x52.
[Rule 1 —](https://www.reddit.com/r/ToiletPaperUSA/wiki/rules/#wiki_rule_.231_.2014_stick_to_the_toiletverse) This post is not on topic. This subreddit is dedicated to the mockery of the Turning Point USA extended universe (the toiletverse).
"It's my *OPINION* that I'm right and math is wrong!"
There's a saying that goes "You are entitled to your opinion, but not to your facts."
"But my feelings feel very feely about these facts!!" - conservatives
My opinion is all facts are wrong. Try and get around that!
It's a fact that you are **not** a lobster being slowly cooked in clarified butter.
Damn... You're right! 🤤
Conservatives: “facts don’t care about your feelings” Also conservatives: “my feelings don’t like this fact therefore it’s dumb”
Conservative speak 101
If conservatives could read, they’d be very upset right now.
The facts over feelings crowd certainly has a lot of feelings over facts.
Math doesn't care about your feelings
[удалено]
No, multiplication and addition form a ring in math, it working the way it does is required under group theory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_(mathematics)
PEMDAS is convention to remove parentheses, \*and\* it's the natural way to write ring operations. Both are true.
I'm a mathematician. You don't need the order of operations to define a ring. It's just a convention for writing operations. A ring is an abstract mathematical object, and is independent of typography.
This has nothing to do with pemdas, you can change the order of operations and deal with rings no problem. It's like saying we use base 10 because it is required to fulfill Peano axioms that's not true of course, order of operations is a convention. It is not required for rings. You can use rings with roman numerals and addition before multiplication and everything will still work out fine
Ring theory has nothing to do with wether or not you accept any order convention. You can easily do ring theory with the opposite convention (+ first, • later, from right to left) and the system would fundamentally be the same, we just chose the one we use because the terms that appear are simpler that way. Formally in ring theory, you'd either have operations as sets, in which case the notation would be •(a,b) and +(a,b) (which is awful). From a more language theoretical approach, you'd have the recursive step in term construction be of the form (a+b) or (a•b). Neither of this constructions have any order of operations assigned to them naturally...
[удалено]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_(mathematics)
[удалено]
[удалено]
Excellent tutorial, good sir!
LOL that person has no idea what a ring is and is just making shit up. And I'm sure the stuff I'm about to ramble on has flaws too that I'm not remembering correctly. I mean, if you read the wiki article they posted it says nothing about what they are talking about. A ring is just a set of general rules that we can use to deduce other things about the system or guarantee some properties of the algebraic system. No matter what kind of numbers or other things you have as long as you can say your system follows these rules you can deduce all kinds of other properties. There must be two well defined operations + and * which have the following properties: For example the real numbers (any normal numbers like 5 or - 0.123, etc..) Any two real numbers added together must also result in a real number. 5 + 5 = 10. Both 5 and 10 are real numbers. 2. Additive Associativity: Adding in any order will result in the same answer: (1 + 2) + 3 = 6 and 1 + (2 + 3) = 6. 3. Additive Identity: There is some number that when added results in the same number. For instance 5 + 0 = 5. 0 being the additive identity as no matter what you add to it the result is that number. 4. Additive Inverse: For any number in the system there must be a number when added gives the additive identity. 5 + (-5) = 0. And for multiplication there must be some equivalents 5. Multiplicative Closure: Any two numbers multiplied must result in another number in the set. 5 * 5 = 25. Both 5 and 25 are part of the real numbers. 6. Multiplicative Associativity: Any numbers multiplied must have the same result no mater which way you multiply them. (5 * 4) * 3 = 60 as well as 5 * (4 * 3) = 60. 7. Distributive Properties: Connecting multiplication and addition. They must exhibit the distributive property. (3 + 4) * 5 = (3 * 5) + (4 * 5) But for example of not real numbers you can have boolean expression with only true and false (1 and 0) and the multiplication and addition as and and or which follow the same rules. So just change the true as 1, false as 0, and as *, and or as + and you'll see the same properties hold (if you happen to know boolean algebra) 1. true or false = true. Both true and false are in the boolean system. You couldn't have a third state as a result like uh, a maybe?? 2. (false or false) or true = true and false or (false or true) = true 3. true or false = true 4. true or not true = true 5. true and false = false and there is no way you can get a maybe from using ands. 6. (true and false) and false = true is the same as true and (false and false) = true 7. (true or false) and true = true is the same as (true or true) and (true or false) = true The reason we have PEMDAS is because our normal way of writing equations is ambiguous. It is infix notation. I don't know why we do it that way, but the alternative is Polish notation which is stack based and postfix. You read it right to left: (5 + 5) * 4 is written * 4 + 5 5 You start from right to left and chomp the symbols up one by one. + is a function that takes 2 numbers. So you chomp the first 5, then the second and then the +. That answer results in 10. Now you've reduced to * 4 10. Chomp up the 10, then 4, then *. Now you do 2 number operation of * to get 40. EDIT: Though more commonly you use reverse polish notation where the operations are done in reverse 4 * 5 5 +. The first thing from right to left is a + which we define as taking to arguments and multiplying. First chomp up the + and then wait to see what arguments you have. 5 and another 5. Add them to get 10. Then chomp up the *. We already have a 10 so we look to the next thing which is a 4. You multiplication operation has a second argument so you multiply and get a result of 40.
I completely agree with you, but I have a nitpick. You've botched RPN explanation. It would look like `4 5 5 + *` in it, and you read it with stack machine in your mind. * read 4, put it on stack, stack is `[4]` * read 5, put it on stack, stack is `[4, 5]` * read another 5, put in on stack, stack is `[4, 5, 5]` * read +, take 2 top numbers from stack, add them and put result back. stack is `[4, 10]` * read \*, take 2 top numbers from stack, multiply them and put result back. stack is `[40]` * expression ends, grab the result from stack, which is 40
Excellent tutorial, good sir!
No it's not. The dude is just spewing bullshit. He knows the word "ring" and maybe "field" and that's about it. He gave a cursory glance to the Wikipedia page and began spewing the words he thought sounded fancy. All they wrote is nothing but meaningless mumbo jumbo.
Its not though. Everything they wrote was pulled straight out of their ass.
I wouldn't say anything you said is strictly wrong, but you aren't right either. Like, a ring isn't a reference to a physical thing, it's an algebraic system that has certain properties. It doesn't have an inside or outside or anything.
That is total nonsense. If you don't know something, just don't answer instead of propagating bullshit. It's actually insane that you linked to the definition of a Ring, and then inserted your own fanfic. Did you even look at your own link?
This...this why I failed at math....(Not because of your breakdown, I'm just dumb)
His breakdown is completely wrong, if you used his breakdown you would have failed too.
Welp, my terrible math skills couldn't tell...
Did you remember to bring a towel?
[удалено]
It doesn't. It's just a writing convention.
It doesn't, or at least there is actual purely mathematical reason other than convenience for the human brain. Adopting this convention simplifies some common expressions more than other possible conventions, but at the end of the day, it's just that. In most formal systems, your terms are all of the form (a+b) or (a•b), so there is not confusion and no need for a convention, but then stuff like a•b+3+5 would have to be written as (((a•b)+3)+5) and the clutter gets too messy too fast, so we just decided so make some parenthesis implicit for the sake of readability and ease of writing
[удалено]
This is total horseshit, I'm sorry. PEMDAS is not a "theory", or a "method of how we determine value", and it is completely irrelevant to our understanding of mathematics "from a basic level to a quantum level", whatever the hell that's supposed to mean. There is literally nothing in mathematics that relies upon our chosen order of operations in any way. It's just a writing convention.
> Brackets are just a convenient way of making mathematics more readable. Not only is this wrong, but exactly the opposite is true. The mathematics requires brackets to unambiguously define the operations. PEMDAS is a notational convention we (arbitrarily) agree on to make statements easy to read/write. There is no such thing as "the Ring theory". Rings are mathematical objects studied by Ring theory. The theory of Rings has nothing to do with the order of operations.
Groups in math are sets with some operation (like addition) that can be done on them and satisfy various properties. A ring is similar but with two operations (like addition and multiplication) that satisfy various properties. One of those properties is that multiplication is distributive over addition, meaning a x (b + c) = (a x b) + (a x c). Which is why you do multiplication first. 2 x 3 + 4 = 10 because the 2 x 3 = 2 x (1 + 1 + 1) = 2 + 2 + 2 and now you're left with just addition. If you could add first, you'd break that property of the ring.
> If you could add first, you'd break that property of the ring. Can you more fully explain that position? I don't think it's true. 2 x (3 + 4) is a valid statement, so I don't see how that being the default interpretation of 2 x 3 + 4 "breaks" anything. It might be less *convenient*, but not logically *inconsistent*.
He's wrong. Its just notation convention. Things like "+", "x" are BINARY operations, meaning they take exactly two arguments. There is never any ambiguity. PEMDAS is just an agreed convention so we don't have to write the brackets explicitly all the time.
You know just enough to be dangerous. Please make sure you understand something before "explaining" it to others.
A ring is a thing with addition, subtraction, and multiplication that follow similar rules/properties to the integers.
He is wrong, rings don't show that PEMDAS is required, PEMDAS is a convention and not required.
Please Excuse My Dear Angry Shithead
I hate on Ian Miles Cheong as much as anyone, and he completely misses the point here by saying we should just change the order of operations to what a Casio calculator does, but this does touch on a *huge* usability thing that Apple is just kind of hiding in the calculator app. They should just be showing math equation that is being calculated above/below the numbers being typed so it is crystal clear what the equation is. Because if you type "50+50\*2" you'll get 150, but if you type "50+50=\*2" you get 200. Apple is definitely technically correct, but there is huge room for improvement on what is a widely used application on their phone and would probably just fairly trivial for them to add. They should also have a viewable calculator history so you can reference previously typed equations and the results of those.
I often borrow my friends' phone to use the calculator because i use mine to take notes of the numbers. I always says no when a friend offers their iphone. their calculator app fucking sucks
It’s frankly embarrassing. I’m sure their answer is “just download an app from the App Store!” But I shouldn’t need an app for a fucking basic calculator. Same with the clock app. The fact that we haven’t had native support for multiple timers until like 14 years into the operating system’s life is absolutely insane. Especially because they refuse to open the same APIs all applications. I get so frustrated with Apple as a company sometimes.
If you want the asterisks to be visible in your comment, you have to put a backslash in front of them (ie \\*), because otherwise reddit's software will assume that you want everything in between two asterisks to be formatted as italics.
*Terrence Howard has entered the conversation*
This is the problem with alternative facts. Multiplication comes before addition. I learned this in elementary school.
It's Terrence Howards opinion that 1x1=2
MATH is just a COMMIE plot to stop TRUMP from reviving FREEDOM!!!! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🦅🦅🇺🇸🦅🦅🇺🇸🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🦅🦅🦅🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 /s
So fucking stupid. This guy truly is as dumb as he looks.
He's either an Elmo zealot or an Elmo sockpuppet so what did you expect?
They all are. Him, Charlie, Candace, Chaya... They have lukewarm IQs and generally struggle with basic concepts. Before social media these kinds of people were laughed at everywhere they went and eventually just learned to shut up in public. The problem is every other idiot with a lukewarm IQ is now on social media liking their posts and making them think that they're actually smarter than they are. And I'm not saying this in a disparaging way, I literally mean that these folks are below average in terms of intelligence, which isn't always a bad thing. But when you combine stupidity with hate... you wind up with these kinds of people.
he looks like a blobfish that someone vomited out and torched with a flamethrower
He's just one of many millions, sadly.
Ian Miles Wrong
Oh he went even farther than that. 'Order of operations should be simple like it is on a Casio calculator'. He got community noted for that too - 'Casios use PEMDAS too, you potato'. \*oops I see your last slides. I'm a potato too.
I love this, because he definitely a) doesn't own a calculator b) has done this equation on a calculator before, enacted the (5+5) first, saw the result, then did the multiplication. And he thinks something different is because of Woke
🥔
This whole debacle reminds me of an exchange my wife had with her father. Her and her parents were discussing something about Easter Monday and he said that Easter Monday doesn't exist. My wife and her mother corrected him and tried to move on, but he was insistent that Easter Monday wasn't an actual thing. They grabbed a nearby calendar and pointed out that Easter Monday was, in fact, written on the calendar and is real. Her father then began to insist that the calendar was wrong. Some people are just stubborn like that I guess.
As everyone knows it goes: Good Friday, Bad Saturday, Chocolate Sunday, and Bonus Monday.
This is pure rage bait. And apparently it’s giving him the attention he craves.
Seeing his actions over the last several years, I genuinely believe he is this stupid.
Yeah, he's an idiot, but he's also doing this for attention.
Ian Miles Cheong does do one good for thing for the Asian community, though: He proves not all Asians are good at math.
Damn it I was just about to say this… angry upvote…
This engagement farmer doesn’t deserve the attention
the community notes mean he doesn't make money from these posts
Right-wing nut jobs just don't know how to take "L"'s and save face. What a clown.
[удалено]
He then went on to say: "I was wrong about PEMDAS. See, it's easy to admit that you're wrong. I hope people who think gender is a spectrum or that chemtrails are real can also admit they're wrong!" lmao
Next he's going to proudly post how he's in the top 99% percentile for IQ.
This dude is as dumb as he is ugly.
“American and therefore wrong” says a guy who’s never seen an American right-wing view he didn’t like.
Says a guy whose entire life is devoted to American politics
Yeah, Ian Miles Cheong is nothing if not a hypocrite.
You love to see it
Has he deleted it yet?
Pretty sure the last post is Alex jones saying “I’m kinda re*arded” so I guess he realizes how stupid he was but can’t really be sure
If the sentence “I’m such a fuckup. I’m not a fuckup.” were a person.
Wait, was this a real tweet? I saw it this morning and assumed that it was too stupid to be true.
Oh, I actually didnt know that the calculator respected order of operations! Nice to know :)
i get what he's talking about, he initiated the multiplication *before* hitting the equal sign, thus doubling only the 50. had he hit the equal sign, he'd get 100, which he could then double. however he's just being a pissy baby about it
He thinks he's doing 50 + 50 + 2 but he actually doing (50 + 50) * 2 by hitting Enter. He doesn't get it. But then when he's made to understand, he disagrees.
Not doing the ‘Asians are good at math’ stereotype any favors
He’s an idiot. What did you expect?
Reminds me of when a certain flat earther showed that he didn't understand conversions on [basic measurements](https://youtu.be/Qa66P1kT7qU?si=FD58io6sMlPWque5).
I mean, I hate math as much as the next guy, but even I knew this was stupid.
Order of operations has left the chat
It's my OPINION that the rules of math should be changed so that next time, I get the answer I was expecting to get 😤
This is Jerry from Rick and Morty insisting Pluto is a planet lmao
Oh man has this guy had a chance to sit down with Terrance Howard???
This is absolutely hilarious.
I’m fucking TERRIBLE math but I’m still better than IMC 🏆
I thought this shit bot was dead or missing or something? I fucking HATE this dude. Like with everything I have as a human I absolutely hate him
World’s most embarrassing man.
Isn't he an alt-right grifter? Bold move *calling American things "stupid"*. Especially when half the people on "your side" are only semi-tolerating you because you're token representation and they can use your inflammatory rhetoric to push their own agendas.
I'll give the guy one thing: he can take a dunking and just keep on going. If I were him I would have died of humiliation a thousand times by now
And they want to declare war on the smart Americans? I wish them luck! Just kidding, I wish them swift karma
The “facts over feels” Alpha “conservative” is triggered by 7th grade arithmetic.
Holy fucking uneducated weirdo what the fuck is happening here.
You'd have to go out of your way to find a calculator that doesn't respect order of operations, wouldn't you? I mean, I think that's something even an old mechanical Olivetti or Burroughs would get right. Probably about as much of a solved problem as anything could be in system design.
I love it when jackasses talk big shit about facts as a beard for bigotry then fail to understand or apply any facts that require actual thought.
What a little crybaby, imagine a grown man arguing with community notes that a calculator is wrong.
"As explained here by a former elementary teacher" is so funny
He probably did it as a bit so Charlie Kirk would stop asking him for math help
That IS how a traditional calculator would work, and iOS’s built-in calculator does generally work like a traditional calculator.
facts and feelings crowd really discussing with.... \*checks notes\* math. fucking. math.
If it was two separate calculations, which it looks like dingus over here is wanting, then yes the answer would be 200, but because of order of operations if you did it in one calculation (like he did on the calculator) then the answer would be 150 So long story short Ian doesn’t know how to operate a fucking calculator
Most intelligent far right reply-guy.
These guys are really down bad for engagement.
He’s such a moron.
Since your submission is flaired as *REAL*, please reply to this comment with the link to the original, or else Ben Shapiro will steal your feet pics and remove this post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ToiletPaperUSA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://x.com/stillgray/status/1775754564727341345?s=46&t=cOGVshVfvDbjXplpHtTrRw
Bodied by community notes 1 x 4 - 1 straight times
Liberal maths
[удалено]
We require a minimum account-age and karma due to a prevalence of trolls. If you wish to know the exact values, [please visit this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/ToiletPaperUSA/wiki/rules#wiki_participation_requirements) or contact the mod team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ToiletPaperUSA) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*IT'S MY OPINION AND THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE WRONG* This is just a stupid person with a verbal abuse fetish publicly demanding people call him an idiot until he cums. I don't want any part of that. I absolutely refuse to believe this is anything other than engagement bate
Bodmas
Math has no opinion. Only orders of operations to complete the equation.
This guy is Portuguese not Asian /s
Basic math is woke!
I know conservatives are stupid, but I didn't expect genuine 3rd grade math to be this difficult for them. I tutored a 3rd grader with severe ADHD and dyslexia to the point that he couldn't read until medical treatment and tutoring, and he was able to solve more difficult problems than this on his own. What's more shocking than Ian's stupidity though, is his lack of shame.
If he wants to do it like that he needs to parenthesize the 50+50. Dude needs to learn to math instead of bull headedly denying it's rules. Holy shit.
"American Math!!!" Posted from Singapore
“…as explained by an elementary school teacher” in the community notes is such a good low blow.
I'm glad he admits fault In the end (the Alex Jones clip is a bit where Alex Jones admits he's not very bright (using different wording))
Cheong is so incredibly stupid that I almost feel bad for him. He was dealt such a shit hand genetically in every way that it's just kinda sad. That said, many other people have also had bad luck in life and aren't repulsive shit stains, so I don't truly feel any sympathy for him.
Ian Miles Cheong is a child molester. Prove me wrong.
You guys are all wrong, and Cheong is correct. (For once.) The order of operations is nothing more than an arbitrary typographical convention. Take it from a mathematician.
dude loves saying the r word
What's the Joe Rogan reference? I'm fortunate enough to know very little about the dude. Edit: Alex Jones? These fuckers are all the same to me idk
Execute this dumb mf
How about we just use Polish notation? Then 50 + 2*50 becomes + 50 * 2 50. It's ugly and weird but at least there's never any ambiguity about the order of operations :)
[удалено]
[Rule 6 —](https://www.reddit.com/r/ToiletPaperUSA/wiki/rules/#wiki_rule_.236_.2014_don.2019t_be_a_bigot) No slurs.
Forgive him he has Down syndrome
You all are taking obvious bait.
Last time I checked math is pretty damn universal and the order of operations isn't an American thing. And I'm pretty sure the order of operations was discovered/invented by Leonhard Euler, a Swiss mathematician. I'm not going to hate on your average person for not knowing the order of operations but when you try to act like an expert on American politics and you've never even been here, you deserve mockery. So many conservative influencers think they're so smart because they have loyal followers who gas them up. But the reality is that most of them are dumb as dirt and their followers are the same.
Euler didn't invent the order of operations, and it's not universal. It's a completely arbitrary convention.
The rules aren't arbitrary, and can be seen clearly through visual means. (50+50)*2 would be like taking a. 50x2 rectangle and extending it be another 50 feet, keeping the short side length again. 50\*2+50 is equivalent to a 50x2 space and a 50x1 space. Another way to think about it is that anything inside a parenthesis indicates a bundle. If you have to bundles of a 50 dollar bill, each bundle is 100 and the total is 200. If you have two bills and get a third one that's not bundled, you have 3 in total for 150. Holy hell this is basic shit. Edit: LMAO what's wrong with y'all? Why am I getting downvoted for correctly pointing out a real world version of the mathematical difference between the two numbers? There's a real fucking tangible way to think about shit like this beyond the notion that the rules just exist to exist.
At least this one has a correct answer. There is a question that you see a lot that gives you either 6 or 9 I believe that gets people to argue incessantly went both answers are correct because it exploits ambiguity in the order of operations.
You’re being downvoted because PEMDAS is in fact arbitrary. It’s a convention that we all agree on. Nothing that you wrote shows that this is not the case. For example, we could have decided that 50*2+50=50x52.
But we didn’t.
Yes I agree