1664
Comments (106)
sorted by:
86
NdNcenti 86 points ago +86 / -0

Math, it’s that thing you said you would never need when you grow up!

57
deleted 57 points ago +58 / -1
26
DearCow 26 points ago +26 / -0

I work in rigging, and my boss became a multi millionaire using it. One contract of many simultaneous contracts, earned him $10,000 a week. I don't think he finished high school, but he aced Math.

7
rootGoose 7 points ago +7 / -0

Side question: what is in the scope of 'rigging'.

18
DearCow 18 points ago +18 / -0

It's film rigging, so it can get very broad, but basically hanging grids (dead hung or motors), for lighting and set support, Scaffolding of many types, operation of man lifts, rough terrain forklifts, tenting houses & buildings for night scenes, anything on-set Grips don't have time to do. 40' airwalls for Green Screen. My boss got rich because he invented a bunch of one-of-a-kind shit, too specific to be mass produced.

4
rootGoose 4 points ago +4 / -0

Got it.

Good for him!

1
brother_red 1 point ago +1 / -0

Kish?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
DearCow 1 point ago +1 / -0

Doesn't ring a bell, but congratulations on your new job! The best advice I can give you is to become as specified as possible with an eye to what kind of jobs will still be around in 30 years plus. You don't ever want to do a job where you can be replaced by any dude off the street.

1
facesmelt 1 point ago +1 / -0

To be fair, that is still only making use of middle school Algebra--addition, subtraction, multiplication and division.

I doubt you need advanced calculus to figure out your bottom line or keep yourself out of debt with proper wages and contracting.

1
DearCow 1 point ago +1 / -0

Trigonometry is grade 10 where I come from. Are high school's county grade 12 and some places great 13. He designed some extremely sophisticated things and some of them are very massive, 70 feet hi my three hundred feet in length. which are being rented by 20 other countries.

1
rootGoose 1 point ago +1 / -0

They're trying to stay away from racist things.

73
sineater 73 points ago +73 / -0

What do you mean you're not sure you agree? Does this bitch actually think math is debatable?

44
Raindrops1984 44 points ago +44 / -0

Welcome to Common Core math, where the problems are made up and the numbers don’t matter.

13
TripleBlack 13 points ago +13 / -0

All that matter is did you group the 10's and explain your reasoning.

4
Deaduponaviral 4 points ago +4 / -0

See that was my disconnect with math. It wasn’t taught like it could be used in an applicable hands on matter. I use it everyday now but it bored the ever loving fuck out of me in school.

18
RiverRunnerVDB 18 points ago +18 / -0

If it proves that their opinion is wrong? Yes.

2
doodaddy 2 points ago +2 / -0

Now do “science”. By and large it’s “applied math”. These people mock you for not listening to their science heroes like Bill Nye

2
KuhlooKuhlay 2 points ago +2 / -0

if you just use the metric system the math works out and makes it possible somehow.

1
thekindlyman555 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's just his truth.

38
deleted 38 points ago +38 / -0
16
Peppers 16 points ago +16 / -0

My brother and I did 2200 miles in 36 hours in a Datsun 240 Z. We were 17 + 19, so young enough to have the energy. Never shut the car off because we were afraid it wouldn't start again, lol

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
21
deleted 21 points ago +22 / -1
7
Peppers 7 points ago +7 / -0

We just pumped the gas, no one cared. We shut it off the first gas stop and had to push start it and didn't want to risk it.

6
RighteousViolence1 6 points ago +6 / -0

I only shut my truck off to get gas maybe half the time. Been doing that for almost 20 years. It’s safe.

5
JimDandy 5 points ago +5 / -0

Oh NO! You probably even check your cell phone while the pump is running too!

7
DarkMemeDuck 7 points ago +7 / -0

I think 8 hours in my max. Any more and it's just too much driving for one day.

5
Aletheia 5 points ago +5 / -0

I have done 20 hours and it's exhausting, and that was 1000 miles. I stop every 2 hours and have at least a 15 minute rest.

4
JimDandy 4 points ago +4 / -0

Drove Seattle to LA 1000 miles in a Mazda RX2 in about 18 hours. I could not turn off the engine unless there was a hill big enough to get up 35 mph to pop the clutch. The seals on the engine were shot. Not a fun drive

2
PraiseBeToScience 2 points ago +2 / -0

My longest one shot drive was from Balmorhea in Texas (little town on I-10 I slept in my car in on my first leg from San Diego) to Fort Walton Beach in FL. 1,250 miles, over 16 hours, by myself.

It was incredibly dangerous at the end because I was so tired, but I was so close I didn't want to stop.

Total was 2100 miles in about 35 hours.

2
spezisapedo 2 points ago +2 / -0

i drove up to Colorado (nearly a 20 hour trip from NOLA) with my gf just a few weeks after we stared dating.... It was nice. Legal weed is a great concept for vacations.

24
Meatbank84 24 points ago +24 / -0

Haha every leftist ever

Here’s established science, facts, and data.

-I don’t agree

9
deleted 9 points ago +9 / -0
20
YGBSM99TFS89USAF 20 points ago +20 / -0

LOL - thanks Pede, good laugh ...Well, if i didn't sleep, then i could make it in a day...

13
deleted 13 points ago +13 / -0
10
N7fury 10 points ago +10 / -0

What's worse is the source nazis don't ever read the sources you link 9 times out of 10. I can't tell you how many times I give them like several links and they reply in about a minute. Obvious they have no interest in learning anything new or changing their programming.

11
TripleBlack 11 points ago +11 / -0

Me: source: some.conservative-site.com/article

Them: Oh that's a fake news right wing site! Do you have a main stream linked article?

Me: If you actually read the link, you would see it's a collection of linked mainstream articles. If you're calling it fake news, you're calling the the sources fake.

Them: deletes-post

2
N7fury 2 points ago +2 / -0

Had that happen the other day when the Minnesota Senator was beaten near where the agitators were tearing down a statue. I think it was a Fox News article and this user called it fake news. I was like did you read the article? The source was the Senator's Twitter feed along with photos of him being badly beaten. There's only two possibilities. Either the Democratic Senator faked it or Fox is reporting it accurately. Take your pick. No response of course

4
PraiseBeToScience 4 points ago +4 / -0

Notice they never call their own side for sources.

2
brsmith77 2 points ago +3 / -1

I recommend replying "Look it up yourself, you lazy cunt"

Fucking sheep demanding to be spoon-fed everything piss me right off.

11
freebirdie 11 points ago +11 / -0

This reminds me of a conversation I had with my mother about cloth masks. She kept insisting that if the saliva/mucus from an infected person is contained by a mask, and the other person has a cloth mask on, that the virus won't be transmitted. I tried to explain that the size of the virus is far smaller than the weave on a cloth mask, but she wouldn't budge. I finally asked her, can you smell a fart wearing a cloth mask? She then tried to argue that it was methane that stinks, not aerosolized fecal material. I pulled up data to prove her wrong and she became furious with me and told me that she "believes the masks work and that's all that matters." This is a woman who believes herself intellectually superior to most people. I told her that with this argument she lost the ability to ever claim the intellectual high ground again.

2
myswedishfriend 2 points ago +2 / -0

Molecules that humans can smell are thousands of times smaller than a virus. There's still no evidence that masks are effective. But this fart thing needs to drop. It's an amusing analogy but simply not correct.

9
Truth_Cipher 9 points ago +9 / -0

Math, its so divisive. You see the denominator is there to separate the numerator. This is exactly what BLM is trying to fight. F all of these crazy people who want to live in fan fiction and are ashamed of their own shadow.

2
Icetor 2 points ago +2 / -0

uh, i think you mean "fan fraction"

9
Memes_of_our_Fathers 9 points ago +9 / -0

Critical thought is no longer taught in a standard liberal arts education. Thinking for yourself isn’t promoted at all. Instead, it has been replaced by an exercise in compiling a list of almighty and powerful sources that you can cite to agree with your argument. This approach is valid in making an actual argument. Except they aren’t making anything. Both the arguments and the sources are handed to these people. They don’t have to actually “think” at all. That’s why arguing with these people is so frustrating. They’ve been handed pre crafted arguments and “approved and trustworthy sources” which is all they have. You’re not debating these people. You’re debating the internalized propoganda provided to them by think tanks and foreign governments. And the people who rise to the top of this circus are either master regurgitaters (average misguided college student), or have applied a limited sort of critical thinking, but only within the confines of their false world view, giving them the ability to build and expand upon these false ideas in often ridiculous and more extreme ways (ie professors).

8
Alars 8 points ago +8 / -0

Gender is a social construct

Math is racist

The ice caps will melt by 2015

What else?

7
jack1989 7 points ago +7 / -0

Math is racist you didn't know. LOL

7
Kaarous 7 points ago +7 / -0

Well, I'm not sure if I agree but ok

Not sure if he agrees... with a third grade math concept...

God hates liberals.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
5
Qlasers 5 points ago +5 / -0

Sad thing is, for all we know this person probably has an advanced degree from an "accredited" institution. I feel bad for pedes who earned diplomas in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. Now they just give them to anyone who can pay to attend a university. Which is everyone considering we all can get student loans.

Universities have no incentive to maintain standards, just keep increasing enrollment every year and raising tuition. No wonder so many white collar entry level jobs require master's degrees and 3-5 years experience. Half the people graduating with a bachelors these days have the 80s equivalent of a middle school education.

5
electricboogaloo 5 points ago +5 / -0

ipkWvQlp EZBH7Iin7HLhAS hG5g hx0h Ga I 0ymiXX

5
NoahGav 5 points ago +5 / -0

Wait! Not sleeping gives you more time in a day? So if I don't sleep I can stay up for 26 hours. Now I finally see how I can get everything done.

4
Klcbva 4 points ago +4 / -0

My head hurts.

4
utfanx2 4 points ago +4 / -0

What if he drives 88 mph?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
4
bouki 4 points ago +4 / -0

It's like a scene from dumb and dumber!

Hahahaha

3
knightofday 3 points ago +4 / -1

Posts like this are clearly foreign shills imo, couldn’t be more clear. It’s probably some Chinese 12 year old peasant named Wang being forced/paid to from Beijing on a site they control for 50 hours a week. He really probably doesn’t know simple US math srs haha

3
Seruna_Kanus 3 points ago +3 / -0

Common core doesn't teach proper math. It teaches head math methods used by people that can do head math to people who cannot head math to begin with and therefore are less likely to learn it. That's why proper paper math is important, it allows a person to follow the process and check.

3
MrAlwaysRight 3 points ago +3 / -0

BBBuyt what if I go 100 miles an hour, never slow down, never get gas, and never sleep...

2
LacyLiberty 2 points ago +2 / -0

And never get stopped for a speeding ticket.

2
TrumpManTrumpMan 2 points ago +2 / -0

Jesus this is sad. People out here not able to do simply division. "What's your source" lol

2
TrumpsGlassOfWater 2 points ago +2 / -0

ITS NOT IN WIKIPEDIA SO ITS NOT TRUE HA

Stupid ass Drumpfster

8
rootGoose 8 points ago +8 / -0

"For real people, if something works in theory, but not in practice, it doesn't work.

For academics, if something works in practice, but not in theory, it doesn't exist."

Nassim Nicholas Taleb

2
C0RNP0P 2 points ago +2 / -0

Math: Agree to disagree

2
TyrannyBuster 2 points ago +2 / -0

Math must be so inconvenient for the left. They really hate statistics too.

2
DearCow 2 points ago +2 / -0

Isn't it great when dumb cunts double-down on their bullshit?

2
Brookes 2 points ago +2 / -0

The maths is hard! Lol! What a complete moron.

2
Jsmitty112 2 points ago +2 / -0

Holy shit some of these people are absolute neanderthals. Smooth brained mfers

2
victorywin 2 points ago +2 / -0

everything is based on feelings and beliefs.

"believe" in climate change, "believe" in systemic racism

2
Jewsacky 2 points ago +2 / -0

How about go 83mph, problem solved

2
Teddy_Schmoozevelt 2 points ago +2 / -0

Same response when you tell them this virus has a 99.95% survival rate.

They ask where do you get that from? Literally divide the number of deaths by the number of cases and you get the percentage.

Explain that to them and they respond with "Hm I don't know about." Like you don't agree with math? Ok.

1
facesmelt 1 point ago +1 / -0

I actually wished they were at least smart enough to come back with something like, "WeLl wHaT iF i DrOvE 80mPh! cHeCkMaTe dRumPfTaRd!"

Because most people don't realize you would have to AVERAGE 80 mph for the ENTIRE time period. Meaning, all those times you come to a stop sign or a traffic light and are going 0 mph would be averaged in... Or when you are on a residential street and maybe going 35-40 mph. It would be insane to actually average 80mph for 2000 miles of a public road anywhere in the United States, besides possibly a point to point trip that takes place on Route 80 alone.

1
Forgotmyoldpassword 1 point ago +1 / -0

This can't be real, seems like two trolls talking to each other

1
Fabius 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's not even "math" per se, it's fucking arithmetic. Algebra is "math". Geometry is "math". Calculus is "math". This is fucking division.

1
Mavdick96 1 point ago +1 / -0

States fact, disagrees with fact and uses emotions instead of logic. Fucking retard.

1
Berkeley 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why bother arguing with a bot? It's obviously a bot

1
imintheway 1 point ago +1 / -0

If this is what we are really up against, why does this seem so difficult? I know I'll be every _ist in the book, but stupid people shouldn't breed. Genetics 101

1
Ironlabel 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lol they hate math and science what’s new?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
wearefeverpitch 1 point ago +1 / -0

Do they not know there are only 24 hours in a day? Ooofff

1
Large 1 point ago +1 / -0

Math, pretty much the only actual "settled science" has been rendered obsolete because u/shitlordMcDumbass disagrees

1
Hillary2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

To be fair, someone who hasnt taken chemistry or physics wouldnt be able to understand how that math works out by looking at it because they understand units. For those who dont know: 2000 miles / (75 miles / hour), when you divide by 75 miles per hour the denominator flips and is now in the numerator position, hence the resultant units are hours. If I hadnt gone to college for math i wouldnt know it. Lets not be like the left.

0
sdl5 0 points ago +1 / -1

Wait- what?

No......

No.

This is simple logic applied to a very simple real world math calculation.

I didn't take college MATH classes, and I had this kind of practical application of math with information to find answers by 8th grade. Maybe even 4th grade.

How could you not know this?

1
Hillary2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

4th grade education aint what it used to be.

1
Bragg 1 point ago +1 / -0

LOL

1
SAW2TH 1 point ago +1 / -0

Math is hard when it is replaced with gender activism awareness.

1
rootGoose 1 point ago +1 / -0

The jerk was so proud, and stupid, to realize he could have changed his statement to:

...in one session.

1
Icetor 1 point ago +1 / -0

I have a friend who, to this day, rejects the 3 door probability math.

Essentially you have 3 doors with a prize behind 1 (33.3% chance for each) You pick a door, and then a person who knows where the prize is eliminates one of the other 2 that doesn't have the prize. Should you keep the door you initially selected or change to the last remaining door if offered the choice.

The correct answer is that the door you initially selected will always have a 33.3% chance of prize, and the other door will have the remainder of 100% chance, so 66.7% chance

My friend INSISTS that both doors have a 50% chance of having the prize and absolutely will not be convinced by math.

1
sdl5 1 point ago +1 / -0

Wait.

But NOwhere in that descriptor does it say EITHER of the two remaining doors unchosen hold the prize. That is the logic crux.

The knowing person is simply reducing the number of doors to two, and in no way indicating the second unchosen door is more likely to hold the prize than the chosen door.

Thus there is now an equal chance either door has the prize.

The probability calculation is math games on all variables at every moment, not real world outcome likelihood in a single instance.

And that is where theory runs into practice.

Go ahead and try to explain how that is not true. Using only the doors and only a single event. And you will realize why the probability math is theory and your friend is practice.

1
Icetor 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's not theoretical, if you run the scenario 100 times as described, statistically 67 times the prize will be behind the remaining of the 2 doors.

The choice of 1 in 3 doors can never have a probability of more than 1/3 of being correct, whereas if either of the other 2 doors had the prize initially it would not have been removed as a choice by the actions of the 3rd party, so the probability if you change combines the probability of both of the 2 remaining doors.

1
sdl5 1 point ago +1 / -0

Exactly- the game of numbers: the more times run the more the statisical average result is possible.

But that second is a flawed precept: that is applying motivation or intent to an unknown. No one except the person eliminating a door knows if one OR BOTH can be chosen, so no observer can deduce the reason one or the other is chosen. Particularly in a one off case without a pattern of choices graphed against a known location of the prize. Thus neither remaining door IN REALITY has better odds.

1
Icetor 1 point ago +1 / -0

The person eliminating the door would be forced to eliminate a specific door 2/3 of the time, meaning the uneliminated door would have the prize 2/3 of the time. This is a mathematical fact, if you doubt it, feel free to test it.

The fact that it is a single run doesn't change the REALITY of probability. Choosing not to change will be wrong 2/3 of the time, not 1/2 of the time. And in 0 of any random instances will the likelyhood of the initial door having the prize be higher than 33%.

1
PepeTheSailorman 1 point ago +1 / -0

I did 4000 in 3 days and 3 nights. That was a lot of fucking driving