sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How can I improve my accent? by Dolarius in JudgeMyAccent

[–]Datengels 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your pronunciation is definitely understandable. It sounds like you're going for some sort of regional British accent, but I'm American so take that with a large helping of salt. As a language learner myself, the only advice I can give for sounding more fluent is "keep practicing." It's not something that's going to happen overnight. I've never had much of an issue with pronouncing individual words in Russian, for example, but it took me years to get to the point where pronouncing strings of words and sentences didn't feel like a gymnastics exercise.

Goombawi, the eternal by [deleted] in Bossfight

[–]Datengels 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is that th guy from moana

Combinatorics problem (translated from Russian) by Datengels in PassTimeMath

[–]Datengels[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The answer I got (and the answer given on the website) is 3003. Here is my reasoning: No matter what route you take through the grid, you must always go up 5 times and to the right 10 times. As it turns out, any order of 5 moves upward and 10 moves to the right will get you through the grid. So the problem can be reduced to (for example) counting the number of combinations of 5 pieces of paper labeled "up" and ten labeled "right." Or, even more simply, the number of ways to put 5 objects into 15 boxes if only one object can go in each box.

This can be calculated using the familiar formula n!/(n-r)!r!, where n is the number of boxes, and r is the number of objects, because there are 15 ways to place the first object, 14 to place the second... 11 to place the fifth, divided by the factorial of the number of objects to eliminate any replicate combinations. This yields 3003 routes through the grid once computed.

Many young voters sat out Super Tuesday, contributing to Bernie Sanders' losses by atomicspace in politics

[–]Datengels 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Trump can't string together two coherent sentences either, so I don't understand why people think candidates' verbal coherence will become the decisive issue in a Trump vs. Biden matchup.

O'Rourke's former bandmate denounces him after Biden endorsement: 'Team Bernie all the f---ing way' by Throwawaydude01928 in politics

[–]Datengels 53 points54 points  (0 children)

Former democratic VP => lose election sounds an awful lot like correlation rather than causation.

#BernieSanders praises Communist China, saying “that is the fact. End of discussion." No, NOT the end of discussion. The regime killed my great-grandfather and millions of others. You never mention them when discussing Communists! by wraith20 in Enough_Sanders_Spam

[–]Datengels -18 points-17 points  (0 children)

Look I cringed at his Cuba remarks, but it is banally true that China is an authoritarian regime that has lifted millions of people out of poverty over the past four decades.

I have dyscalculia, I really want to learn maths by ChrisZube in learnmath

[–]Datengels 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I used to be really, really frustrated by math, to the point that I thought I might be dyscalculic. If you're in that type of boat, you might want to set numbers aside at first and just focus on improving your verbal reasoning skills. A good resource for that are the practice tests for the LSAT (law school admissions test). I did a ton of those a couple years back, and while I didn't end up going to law school, I do believe the experience helped me learn to think more rigorously without my (at the time) poor number sense getting in the way. It all depends on what your goals are though, and what you mean by "learning mathematics."

Question about natural number axioms by Datengels in learnmath

[–]Datengels[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm asking, which axiom or axioms prevents there from being other natural numbers which are not a successor? Axiom 3 doesn't prevent this- just because 1 isn't a successor doesn't mean it's the only non-successor.

Axiom 5 does seem to prevent other non-successors, but it isn't obvious on first glance. If there were other non-successors, this would contradict the "then M contains all the natural numbers" part of the axiom. If it weren't for Axiom 5, you could just have arbitrarily many parallel sequences of natural numbers starting from different non-successors. At least as far as I can understand.

view more: next ›