Said a simpler way:
1/3= 0.333...
1/3 + 1/3 = 0.666... = 0.333... + 0.333...
1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 = 0.333... + 0.333... + 0.333...
The quirk you mention about infinite decimals not incrementing properly can be seen by adding whole number fractions together.
Like I tell everyone I sleep with, I got 9 inches for you, just be ready to take it in 3 doses ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ
Ain't even gotta do that, just imagine he suffered for 500,000 years and he did, just like everyone and everything you ever knew was created last Thursday
actually they're only slightly off. 3-400m/s
Though that's for individuals. The average is near 0, since they're all going in random directions, canceling each other out.
There's more to transactions than the purchase of goods and services.
Donating money is a transaction. Using counterfeit money to donate while claiming it is legal tender makea the donation fraudulent.
Crawl back under your bridge, mate.
Actually it is inherently illegal. It's fraud.
Because like the previous person said, they're attempting to pass it off as legal tender by getting the homeless person the money so they'll use it.
Yeah, not sure why folks care
I can sue discord and there's nothing their EULA can do to stop me.
God bless our right to litigate*
*terms and conditions apply: enough money to win in a battle of attrition
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.tasks
App has a widget that takes up 40% of my home screen as a check list (checks disabled so I don't fat finger them)
I don't have ADHD, but I do have significant difficulties remembering things and this is the solution that has worked for me for the last 8ish years.
The universe has been around for 14 billion years, and I got to share this moment out of all 14 billion of those years with you.
Remember that (☞ﾟヮﾟ)☞
Put enough of em in front of you and that doesn't matter (☞ﾟヮﾟ)☞
Intolerance of the intolerant is the cornerstone of protecting one's freedoms.
Yes. Desalination or hydrogen separation via electrolysis
Both uses are productive, one generates fresh water, the other can be a form of energy storage.
Both are extremely energy intensive for the yield, making them unprofitable, but are extremely useful things to do with a glut of electricity.
Bro, do yourself a favor and get yourself a good pair of noise cancelling headphones.
This isn't an audiophile thing
Yeah, nah, fuck water. I'm good
Samsung actually allows app cloning for multiple profiles without using secure folder.
I'm not sure if it's a list of supported apps or any as I don't use the feature
I work a shit ton of OT, but I get paid 1.5x or 2x based on circumstances for that extra time
I deliver the same quality of work on ST and OT—my best, but I would never work unpaid OT (e.g. some of my salaried engineers have been living at the job during our system upgrades) or do things well beyond the scope of my job.
Fuck that
The ambiguity doesn't lie in they, it lies in the way the writer constructed that sentence, as the person you responded to already stated.
The writer (and the person they are communicating with) knows the plurality of the "who", an outside observer (us, the readers) aren't privy to that information. Clarification on the part of the writer would provide that context. But the sentence isn't written to be read to a 3rd party, but the other party (the person the writer is communicating with).
99.99% of people understand this intuitively, but this is the way you'd parse the understanding of that sentence.
And if you'll note, in my second sentence, "they" is understood to be singular—the writer.
E: and for Shits n' giggles: if neither party (the writer nor the person being communicated to) knows the plurality of the "who" they are referring to, then it's irrelevant information. They will discover who wrote it when they go searching.
And if you'll note, in that previous sentence, it's understood that I am using the plural they (the writer and the person being communicated to) in both uses of the last sentence.