6% of 80. 1% of 80 is 0.8 0.8 * 6 is (8 * 6)/10 Which is 48/10 = 4.8

80% of 6. I’d probably think of it as (4/5) * 6 = 24/5 Which is 20/5 + 4/5 = 4 + 4/5 = 4.8

Both are easy if you know how to visualise it. The benefit of knowing you can “reverse” it is that you can choose which method is easier for you to visualise. Which is incredibly useful for a lot of people

Edit: lemmy hates the * sign

If that’s what you think, you severely underestimate how much money there is in the world.

Spotify didn’t start seeing yearly profits until 2024.

Twitter didn’t see profits in a single quarter until 12 years after they started. And only went 2 years with actual profits from inception until they were bought out.

Took YouTube 9 years before they saw any profits.

Point being. It’s very normal for big tech companies to not make money for quite some time. OpenAI isn’t alone. It’s the rule rather than the exception.

Will they go tits up? I don’t know. Time will tell. But my guess is that investors will keep pumping in money for at least another 10 years.

What do you mean? Getting something pregnant to access their milk have been standard practise for thousands of years.

Nothing roundabout about it

Most people fart before taking a shit. You probably don’t think of it as a fart just because you’re on the toilet. But it is indeed a fart.

You say you’ve never been in the US. But i have, and I’ve flown both inside and internationally in and out of US. And I strongly disagree. European airports are not the same. They do not look the same.

I’m not sure what makes you think I was talking about the US in particular.

So you did not read the link you sent? Which spoke extensively about the theatrical practises of the US TSA.

Fantastic.

particularly in discussions surrounding the United States Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

Despite popular belief, the world is a lot bigger than just the US, and any airline from across the world would have done the same upon the discovery of a device called “bomb”

I dont know if you’re trying to troll or if you’re actually that dumb. Regardless, here’s a non exhaustive list of all of this “fake theatre blood”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_airliner_bombing_attacks

It could absolutely result in a criminal charge. If it results in a criminal conviction or not is another question.

But any prosecutor could make the argument that it’s a terroristic threat.

Now go on a flight with it active and see how well that goes.

Almost every single aspect of airport security before and after you board is written in blood.

What do you mean? It’s an 8 hour flight to mallorca from NY. 2<8

0

The point is that people who haven’t seen someone drown, may not know what drowning looks like, with the exception of media depictions.

There, fixed that for you.

Drowning does not look like the splashing depictions in media. So that’s not an exception. Because that’s not what drowning looks like.

Way to prove the headline communicates it effectively when you just made that exact mistake.

Drowning 100% looks like drowning. The problem is that people dont know what drowning looks like. Including myself.

You forgot the third possible “outcome”.

In short, you will never change anything in the present, because it already happened.

everything you’ve wanted to go back and change has already been changed by you, you going back doesn’t change anything, because it already happened, you’re just tying up and completing the paradox.

There wouldn’t be anyone for you to go back and kill because if you did and succeeded they wouldn’t even be alive when you decided to go back. E.g. let’s say you wanted to kill Hitler (he’s already dead) All you’ve done is one of the failed assasination attempts. And it’s only now you realise that was you.

They’ve expirenced roughly a 3% increase in their black population from 2010 to today. Going from 3 to 6%.

That’s not a 3% increase in black population. That’s a 100% increase in the black population. Assuming your numbers are correct. You are today, twice as likely to see a black person in France vs 2010. But we’re not talking 2010 are we? We’re talking about the 50’s

I’m sorry but you really have nothing to back up your claim that the “majority of europe” had seen them in real life.

You also seem hyperfocused on Germany and France but i think you’re forgetting the other, roughly 40 countries in europe.

Except for the fact that the vast majority of black soldiers went home and were not deployed in Europe after Germany surrendered.

What does it matter if they were segregated on the battlefield or not, you think there were civilians on the battlefield?

Contrary to what you might believe. Natives in the colonies were not exactly rich. Even in France, during the 50’s the amount of black individuals was measured in a couple of thousand. Not exactly a lot compared to the roughly 40 million french.

Your statement was that the majority of europeans in the 50’s had seen black people with their own eyes. And that’s just not true. I sure plenty had heard about them. Maybe seen pictures. But that’s another thing.

I did not see a black person in real life until i was 16 in 2010 and traveled to Florida. And by then i had already traveled around Germany and France. I do not imagine the probability of bumping into one was higher in the 50’s

Wow. I don’t even know where to begin.

Black US troops (which were segregated from the white troops) did not exactly run around on vacation in the french countryside.

Most French, Dutch, Englishmen, (among others) did not go to any colony. They stayed home… working their normal jobs. Farming the land, making shoes, sewing clothes, building houses. Etc.

And while we’re just starting to grasp the concept of US not being the entire world. I have to inform you of the next class, which will cover the fact that France and Germany is not even close to “most of europe”.

What makes you think “most white people” in Europe had seen a real black person in 1950?