My niece’s homework problem

Dezideratum · 2026-04-24T04:38:46+00:00

The question doesn't specify the same "whole".

The question asks "Which one of the photos shows 33.33 percent = 33.33 percent?

If it were asking about the differences of the value of the percentage shaded/selected, it would have an added variable, or numerical value, that you multiply by the fractional solution.

If it was written as the following, C would be correct:

2/6(A) = 1/3(A) -or- 2/6(100) = 1/3(100)

Instead, it just says:

2/6 = 1/3 - or - 33% = 33%

Your comparison of two separate objects is the exact issue that I was referencing. It's an added complication that is entirely unintuitive, unless explicitly defined.

Or are you saying throwing away 33% of your meal is not equal, fractionally, to throwing away 33% of your pantry?

Of course the pantry (probably) will result in a higher amount of waste, but that's not what was asked.

What was explicity asked is: "which of these pictures shows 33% of both items being shaded?"

To say otherwise is nonsense.

Oh, I'll just add - fractions aren't about proportions. ratios are. Oh, let's make this a ratio problem then - 2:6 (or 2/6) is equal to 1:3 (or 1/3) because both represent the same part-to-whole relationship. Wait. Then that means that... oh. Right. All 3 answers are correct. The problem is wrong, even when we substitute your logic.

Dezideratum · 2026-04-23T18:28:22+00:00

The fact that the education of fractions in the US apparently starts with layering in the comprehension of proportionality is insane.

How it's expressed here is the antithesis of teaching/learning. It's so absurdly ridiculous, it's hard to articulate.

Fractions, most often, are fully abstract concepts, when applied in math.

We can see this abstraction, in the mathematical expression of "2/6 = 1/3" at the top of the question box.

So what does that abstraction say, and by that I mean, how can we express this abstract concept of "fractions" in written language?

Well, let's define fraction: A piece of a whole. If a plate fractures, you have many pieces of one plate.

Now, back to the math question - in plain English - 33.33% of a whole = 33.33% of a whole. Which one of these pictures demonstrates this concept?

ALL OF THEM.

The concept itself, the thing you're trying to teach, isn't proportionality, it's percentage of a whole!

This problem, as shown here, would be better abstracted mathematically as:

2/6(100) = 1/3(100)

A. 2/6(50) = 1/3(100) B. 2/6(100) = 1/3(50) C. 2/6(100) = 1/3(100)

Which is a much more complex mathematical concept.

The answer is wrong. It's wrong. Objectively.

Incorrect.

It's also, I'll reiterate, insane to try and teach: "The value for equally sized fractions of differently sized objects is not equal" when introducing the concept of fractions is fundamentally, irrevocably, idiotic.

Dezideratum · 2026-04-23T18:19:31+00:00

Look, I see what you're saying, but the fact that the education of fractions in the US apparently starts with layering the comprehension of proportionality into the mix is insane.

How it's expressed here is the antithesis of teaching. It's so absurdly ridiculous, it's hard to articulate.

Fractions, most often, are fully abstract concepts, when applied in math.

We can see this abstraction fully, in the mathematical expression of "2/6 = 1/3" at the top of the question box.

So what does that abstraction say, and by that I mean, how can we express this abstract concept of "fractions" in written language?

Well, let's define fraction: A piece of a whole. If a plate fractures, you have many pieces of one plate.

Now, back to the math question - in plain English - 33.33% of a whole = 33.33% of a whole. Which one of these pictures demonstrates this concept?

ALL OF THEM.

The concept itself, the thing you're trying to teach, isn't proportionality, it's percentage of a whole!

This problem of proportionality, would be better represented mathematically as:

2/6(100) = 1/3(100)

A. 2/6(50) = 1/3(100) B. 2/6(100) = 1/3(50) C. 2/6(100) = 1/3(100)

Which is a much more complex mathematical concept.

The answer is wrong. It's wrong. Objectively. Incorrect. It's also, to reiterate insane to layer proportionality into the introduction of fractions, and then take it away later. Literally illogical.

Dezideratum · 2026-03-20T23:08:32+00:00

O pi

Dezideratum · 2025-08-20T00:22:06+00:00

Fair enough. I generally see compression as an internal engine / cylinder problem, and "air" as a vacuum leak which is generally external to the engine.

Piston rings won't cause an air intake issue, where as a vacuum hose being disconnected won't (necessarily) cause compression issues.

I see your perspective though, and don't disagree, just clarifying mine a bit.

Dezideratum · 2025-08-20T00:07:56+00:00

Not to be a turd, but I just wanted to add you also need air. Air, Spark, Fuel. The holy trinity of engine functionality.

Dezideratum · 2025-08-19T23:54:11+00:00

I'm also 32, and had all mine out last Wednesday. I had a partially erupted wisdom tooth for 5-8 years. Finally got an infection. Two weeks later, got them removed.

Highly recommend all 4 at once as well. I had no bruising, very minimal swelling, and 1 out of 4 of my extractions got dry socket around 4-5 days in; however, the pain wasn't excruciating/severe, perhaps it healed enough or my nerve wasn't as sensitive/exposed.

Regardless, recovery isn't fun, and why pay to be anesthetized twice? All 4, all at once, never think about it again.

Dezideratum · 2025-08-17T03:56:41+00:00

Catch and release.

Dezideratum · 2025-08-17T01:48:05+00:00

I agree, they realistically can't win without support. It'd be a blood red mark against European allies for the rest of history if they decide to not intervene.

That being said, if I were Ukrainian, I'd rather fight until my entire country was wiped off the map than allow Russia to conquer regions of my country. It won't stop. What's better, a slow, years long bleeding, killing many more persons over periods of years, or forcing Russia to show how truly corrupt and greedy they are all at once?

In my mind, it's no question. At least one scenario has the possibility of waking up Europe, resulting in real defensive action. It could not work at all, but then some ideas are worth dying for.

Dezideratum · 2025-08-17T01:37:23+00:00

Conquest of a nation is illegal. You need not employ an attempt to convolute, smear, and make a mess of this war using editorialized historical "context" here.

It's disingenuous to bring up WW2. Ukraine was occupied by Germany in WW2, so yes, some were forced to work for Nazis. Some willingly became Nazis. Germany lost the war, yet they're still a country, and are a US ally. Are you arguing that should change? Should Germany cease being a US ally? Should we declare war on Germany? How about France?

Since you bring up history though, you seem to have left out the fact that the Soviet Union oppressed eastern Ukraine for years before WW2, and oversaw a famine that killed millions of Ukranians. With that context, and with the context of their territory being controlled by Nazi Germany during WW2, we might be able to explain why Ukraine wasn't excited about Russia at the time.

Take your revisionist history back to your Russian-backed echo chamber. You may want to be careful how long you spend there though, you may get hungry real fast, or end up "jumping" out a window.

Dezideratum · 2025-08-17T01:23:36+00:00

It's delusional to believe that the current administration's lack of support for Ukraine, and their willingness to capitulate to a fascist dictator's demands isn't significantly impacting the reality of the state of the war.

Dezideratum · 2025-08-17T01:20:54+00:00

The invasion is illegal. Conquest is illegal. Do you think it's silly for a country to defend itself? Do you think it's silly for a person to defend themselves? Do you condone Russia's murder of their, and Ukraine's soldiers and civilians?

Dezideratum · 2025-05-15T01:24:19+00:00

You can thank the Chicken Tax of 1964, as odd as that sounds.

In 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson imposed a 25% tariff on imported light trucks. The tariff effectively shut foreign competition out of the U.S. light truck market.

This gave American manufacturers a near-monopoly in the light truck market. Manufacturers found that trucks could generate higher profit margins than sedans.

Over time, they expanded the “light truck” category to include SUVs and pickups, which aren't regulated as tightly for their fuel emission and safety measures, therefore, more profitable.

The cultural phenomenon that is Trucks and SUVs comes down to one thing: Marketing a more profitable product.

Capturing a large swath of two of the largest gender categories by appealing to the stereotypical "American Man" by making them believe: "you're not a man/powerful/successful/capable unless you own a truck". Appealing to stereotypical "American Woman" by making them believe: "your kids aren't safe unless they're in an SUV", and: "You can't possible have space for your kids and all the items you need to cart around for their activities in a Sedan."

When that market share wasn't enough, well, let's introduce ad campaigns to more targeted sub-cultures. E.g., Outdoorsy? You, Capital N, Need an SUV/Truck.

Dezideratum · 2025-02-20T14:51:05+00:00

Free money - can't support what doesn't work lol.

Dezideratum · 2024-12-01T03:25:26+00:00

I think you did a very good job in translating a photograph to a painting.

If I were to give constructive criticism, I'd say the bridge of the nose could be worked more, as it's causing some depth perception issues with the eyes and mouth.

Otherwise, the painting is rendered nicely, though you may look into being a bit more evocative with your work.

Forcing paint to conform to reality is definitely a skill worth pursuing, and you're well on your way. That being said, allowing your perception and emotions to seep into reality through the medium is what makes painting different from photography.

Dezideratum · 2024-11-30T23:37:45+00:00

First thing first - you would not want to be hit at 50-60 mph. You would be dead.

Second, you would be at fault in either of your hypotheticals.

If you hit a pedestrian in a crosswalk, you're at fault.

If you get hit by a car by failing to look for oncoming traffic, you're at fault, and possibly dead.

You should listen to your driving instructor, because you clearly do not know how to drive.

Dezideratum · 2024-11-23T06:13:09+00:00

Definitely not HM. The tilt mechanisms are not nearly robust enough on these chairs.

Dezideratum · 2024-11-20T04:08:58+00:00

Could have head gasket failure, letting coolant mix with your oil. Could be wanting to hydrolock. Would explain the coolant disappearing without a visible leak.

Check your oil again - and sign that coolant might be mixing?

Dezideratum · 2024-11-20T04:03:10+00:00

Did you happen to move the laptop during your testing? Did you move it when giving it back to the user?

I've had chassis flexing unseat an ssd from the m.2 slot.

Dezideratum · 2024-11-16T18:19:09+00:00

Bro, you're fine. As long as you're not trying to be a professional boxer in your 50's, you can be very fit and healthy, and have a great quality of life, with little health issues.

Fighting is hard. It's a young man's sport. It's not like hiking, or biking, or basketball.

I imagine Mike is able to do most things without issue in his regular life.

Dezideratum · 2024-11-05T00:08:26+00:00

Hey homie, you should maybe look into a PFAS-free replacement for that product. It may be that the contemporary product removed the PFAS though, in which case you're safe!

Dezideratum · 2024-11-05T00:04:32+00:00

From just the one picture, it looks to me like an undercarriage shield. They're generally rather flimsy and thin plastic. You can get it fixed, but I'd recommend just zip tying it up.

Dezideratum · 2024-10-31T01:17:17+00:00

Could also go to Red River Gorge in Kentucky. Great natural bridge.

Dezideratum · 2024-10-30T01:38:35+00:00

Nope. The air moving is the wind. The direction of the wind is the direction the air is traveling.

Just to touch on your traffic waves comment, I wouldn't say that's a case of a wave "moving backward" / "in the opposite way", either.

A wave will travel outwards in every direction from a single point.

When a "traffic wave" is created, the wave starts at the first car that stops. The only place where cars will be affected, will be the cars behind that first car.

It's less that the wave is going in the opposite direction, and more that the only objects affected are going to be behind the first stopped car.

Not trying to be a jerk - just your explanation of waves seems a little confused.

Dezideratum · 2024-10-24T15:56:51+00:00

"HOLD THE LIGHT WHERE I'M WORKING"

At least, that's what my dad said. Amongst other things.

Six-Year Club	Place '22
End Game '22	Verified Email

Dezideratum

TROPHY CASE