The phrasing is intentional. I do just want to see the reasons of hating it, and I think despite the downvotes, it’s working.

Thanks :>

This is an assumption I made from observing users on Lemmy. I want to further understand their reasoning, and therefore put the assumption in the question.

This is why I asked this question. I suspected a lot of people are just hating the economic abuse instead of the technology itself.

Like people are downvoting because they saw the word “blockchain” (I’m guessing. Downvoters tell me why)

Don’t save that guy who took the money

A protestor from a few years ago got sentenced to 10 years in prison, as well as some others with shorter periods (still a few years).

Being fooled IS the mistake

Used in this context? Action. But it can mean both.

May as well combine words with the same pronunciation into one word and call it Simplified English (/s)

Honestly tho, this is one of the features of Simplified Chinese, which created the infamous “fuck vegetables” (干菜类).

It’s meant to say “dried vegetables” (乾菜類 in TC), but 乾→干. Meanwhile, there exists 幹→干 as well, which means “fuck”.

25h for doing a 100% “speedrun” of Paper Mario: The Origami King 5 years ago.

I was the first one to ever do it so I can say I’m a former world record holder :p

Milk can be fried. I don’t see why eggs can’t.

Well I can’t even understand my Mandarin when I speak it

Yeah. It’s not like I can communicate with someone in Cantonese when they only know Mandarin.

If the same script is considered Chinese, might as well put Japanese Kanji inside.

It’s just Java

EndeavourOS. It’s just easy to install and I basically use it like Arch

The problem is the ambiguity of the statement. Is it 50% of each species? Or is it 50% of all life as one set?

If it’s the former case, then sure 3.5b humans and n/2 bacteria gets snapped.

But if it’s the latter case, we group all 7b and n bacteria into one set and snap half of them. This 50% can consist of 50% humans + 50% bacteria, but there’s also a chance for it to include 0% humans + 100% bacteria. Therefore, the amount of humans snap is a random variable instead of a constant.

A squid fried this rice

Yeah maybe posting it here doesn’t really help?

Say, there exists 2 humans and 98 bacteria. Consider all cells of a human one life.

50% of ALL life doesn’t care which species the life is, and therefore there’s a chance that 50 bacteria die. The probability of that happening is 98C50 / 100C50 = 98! 50! 50! / (100! 50! 48!) = (50)(49) / ((100)(99)) = 0.247

For my previous argument, I did not actually do the math. Now that I have done a little bit, the probability seems to converge at 25%

Obviously, this is based on the interpretation of “all life”. For my interpretation, “all life” includes every life in a single set, and apply the 50% snap to that. For some others however, it may be interpreted as each species in their own set, and the 50% snap is applied on each set individually.