[2012-May-17] Discrizzle

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) :( :o :shock: :? 8) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :?: :idea: :| (o~o) :geek: :[] :geek2: :][>:=~+:
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: [2012-May-17] Discrizzle

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Sandwiches » Mon May 21, 2012 11:41 pm

I apologise for what I now realise is book bragging. "Look at all the high-brow books I read".


And no, don't try suicide without reading up on it, don't go in uninformed.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Kaharz » Mon May 21, 2012 11:29 pm

For some reason I read this whole thread, and now I think I'll just try suicide instead of reading a book about it. Unless it is a particularly instructive book. Suicide isn't something you want to screw up after all.

The phrase "for reals" doesn't appear all that much in rap lyrics either I don't think. I do not however have PhD in hip-hop, only a masters.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Sandwiches » Mon May 21, 2012 1:05 pm

It's called Sisyphus and if I want to read it I need to finish The Reprieve and then read The Crying of Lot 49 and then Cat's Cradle.

I put that book too far down the pile when it arrived, I can't move it now.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by DonRetrasado » Mon May 21, 2012 2:15 am

Which one is that? I'm forgetting my Camus here.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Sandwiches » Sun May 20, 2012 10:13 pm

So I guess to sum up, this comic may or may not be true, may or may not be funny and we are wasting our time forever

I bought a book by Albert Camus about suicide I might go read it.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Combinatoria list » Sun May 20, 2012 9:57 pm

Lethal Interjection wrote:
Combinatorialist wrote:
Sandwiches wrote:
Oooooh, I feel like I should correct him

but uh yeah I don't know anything. Do you know something? Do you know, for instance, know all discrete maths ever? Zach seemed to act like it appeared in set theory?

Everyone in this thread has been acting like for reals does at least exist in discrete maths, you are an outlier. I don't know if you are the valiant outsider, exposing our hypocrisies and putting us to shame or if you are a weirdo freakazoid who smells weird.


I have a PhD in discrete math, so yeah, I do know a lot about it. Maybe some people have taken a class called "Discrete Math" and talked about the reals, but they don't belong there. Maybe Zach saw set theory, Cantor's Diagonal Proof, something like that in the class. I like the comics and thought it was odd that Zach would make a mistake like that, so I mentioned it to see what other people thought about it. Relax.


Yeah... well... I have ultra-double PhD in Unproven Titles, where I wrote my thesis on the use of them in anonymous internet correspondence.


Touché! (I also have an anonymous PhD in French)

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Lethal Interjection » Sun May 20, 2012 9:51 pm

Combinatorialist wrote:
Sandwiches wrote:
Oooooh, I feel like I should correct him

but uh yeah I don't know anything. Do you know something? Do you know, for instance, know all discrete maths ever? Zach seemed to act like it appeared in set theory?

Everyone in this thread has been acting like for reals does at least exist in discrete maths, you are an outlier. I don't know if you are the valiant outsider, exposing our hypocrisies and putting us to shame or if you are a weirdo freakazoid who smells weird.


I have a PhD in discrete math, so yeah, I do know a lot about it. Maybe some people have taken a class called "Discrete Math" and talked about the reals, but they don't belong there. Maybe Zach saw set theory, Cantor's Diagonal Proof, something like that in the class. I like the comics and thought it was odd that Zach would make a mistake like that, so I mentioned it to see what other people thought about it. Relax.


Yeah... well... I have ultra-double PhD in Unproven Titles, where I wrote my thesis on the use of them in anonymous internet correspondence.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Sandwiches » Sun May 20, 2012 8:28 pm

NO YOU RELAX

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Combinatorialist » Sun May 20, 2012 7:45 pm

Sandwiches wrote:
Oooooh, I feel like I should correct him

but uh yeah I don't know anything. Do you know something? Do you know, for instance, know all discrete maths ever? Zach seemed to act like it appeared in set theory?

Everyone in this thread has been acting like for reals does at least exist in discrete maths, you are an outlier. I don't know if you are the valiant outsider, exposing our hypocrisies and putting us to shame or if you are a weirdo freakazoid who smells weird.


I have a PhD in discrete math, so yeah, I do know a lot about it. Maybe some people have taken a class called "Discrete Math" and talked about the reals, but they don't belong there. Maybe Zach saw set theory, Cantor's Diagonal Proof, something like that in the class. I like the comics and thought it was odd that Zach would make a mistake like that, so I mentioned it to see what other people thought about it. Relax.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Sandwiches » Sun May 20, 2012 6:05 pm

Combinatorialist wrote:The phrase "for reals" never shows up in discrete math.


Oooooh, I feel like I should correct him

but uh yeah I don't know anything. Do you know something? Do you know, for instance, know all discrete maths ever? Zach seemed to act like it appeared in set theory?

Everyone in this thread has been acting like for reals does at least exist in discrete maths, you are an outlier. I don't know if you are the valiant outsider, exposing our hypocrisies and putting us to shame or if you are a weirdo freakazoid who smells weird.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Combinatorialist » Sun May 20, 2012 5:14 pm

ur dumb wrote:
What he's saying is that the only thing that discrete math and rap have in common is the use of the phrase "for reals"

For reals.


But that doesn't make sense. The phrase "for reals" never shows up in discrete math. "Use of for reals" should be pointing to the section inside "rap music" but outside of "discrete math". I'm not sure how Zach missed that.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by ur dumb » Sun May 20, 2012 5:18 am

ice2097 wrote:...seriously? do people not understand venn diagrams? the only use of "for reals" is the INTERSECTION of rap and discrete math?
jesus fucking christ....



What he's saying is that the only thing that discrete math and rap have in common is the use of the phrase "for reals"

For reals.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Lethal Interjection » Sun May 20, 2012 2:46 am

Sandwiches wrote:Well one interpretation of the venn diagram makes him correct, is the thing. Because that one interpretation is that the intersection means raps about discrete mathematics, but the phrase for reals should appear in every section.

However as we have addressed, it depends. Venn diagrams are kind of shit.


Ahh, but he does use the modifier 'frequent'.

I can't believe I'm defending a comic. A graph comic, no less.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Sandwiches » Sun May 20, 2012 1:18 am

Well one interpretation of the venn diagram makes him correct, is the thing. Because that one interpretation is that the intersection means raps about discrete mathematics, but the phrase for reals should appear in every section.

However as we have addressed, it depends. Venn diagrams are kind of shit.

Re: [17-05-2012] Discrizzle

Post by Yoo-jin » Sun May 20, 2012 1:11 am

ice2097 wrote:...seriously? do people not understand venn diagrams? the only use of "for reals" is the INTERSECTION of rap and discrete math?
jesus fucking christ....


The intersection is a representation of all of the attributes the two circles share. Now the question is, because you questioned it, doesn't that mean you don't understand Venn diagrams?

(Although, people have pointed out that "for reals" might not be so common in discrete mathematics as the comic seems to suggest.)

Top