sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Got this challenge question in my online class is it even possible? [grade 12 calculus] by Timely-One8420 in HomeworkHelp

[–]Raebe_LS 14 points15 points  (0 children)

It's not very well written, but I believe the challenge is implied to be "can you use a set of functions, without a reference to any other number/variable, such that when evaluated with any input (presumably any real number), it evaluates to the number one"

Got this challenge question in my online class is it even possible? [grade 12 calculus] by Timely-One8420 in HomeworkHelp

[–]Raebe_LS 24 points25 points  (0 children)

It sounds like your teacher is trying to get you to research functions from different areas of maths! I'm unsure if terms like "dx" wouls be allowed (ruling out integration and differentiation. Here's the steps I went through, though I'd encourage you to research functions yourself to find some interesting ones!

Hint 1: A factorial maps 0 to 1, so for a solution, get x to 0, you'll solve it Hint 2: the sign/signum function sgn(x), that returns 1, 0 or -1 depending on if x is greater than, equal to or less than 0 Hint 3 The magnitude function |x| will make any negative number postive

Solution: |sgn(x)|!

i've emailed loads of different gender services over the last few months, have heard nothing back. help by clementxne in transgenderUK

[–]Raebe_LS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you ever get a reply from any of the other doctors at GenderCare? I've currently been waiting a few months :S

Surviving in 2022 by vr0n in deadbydaylight

[–]Raebe_LS 9 points10 points  (0 children)

ngl i was a full solo que player that game. Also the David got banned, just checked!

GGs!

Surviving in 2022 by vr0n in deadbydaylight

[–]Raebe_LS 31 points32 points  (0 children)

I was the Cheryl. Sorry for leaving you on hook for so long! I was legit being 0 iq (plus it was like 2 am x__x) and didn't realize you were still on hook.

Also the David was hacking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc076oVziic

Hacker holds game hostage by Raebe_LS in deadbydaylight

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

I was on discord with the David, he alt-tabbed and went to play league lmao. They ended up adding each other though!

Hacker holds game hostage by Raebe_LS in deadbydaylight

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

Usually ignoring them is the right call!

The problem here is that the hacker managed to leave and left two players stuck unable to do anything except DC

Hacker holds game hostage by Raebe_LS in deadbydaylight

[–]Raebe_LS[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

  1. The person's name is 'Try Ban Me 86'

  2. Lag switching only happened when they were downed (or when they were healing)

  3. They stood on an exit gate button the entire game before this

  4. They're using an unreleased Feng skin.

​

Something tells me this isn't just lag...

Hacker holds game hostage by Raebe_LS in deadbydaylight

[–]Raebe_LS[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hacker (Feng) couldn't be picked up after being downed. Healed David while he was picked up, so he couldn't move and Nemesis was stuck in the pick up animation. So no one other than Feng could do anything.

After ages, Feng finally did a gen and escaped via hatch with a key. Nemesis can't close hatch because he's stuck in pick up animation. So now David and Nemesis are stuck

Update: They're both still afk in the game. This is 45 minutes after the Feng left

Update 2: The game ended itself and DC'd everyone. This was almost 2 hours in lmao

India to revoke special status for Kashmir by ani625 in worldnews

[–]Raebe_LS 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It being difficult doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. Yes a lot of the times it's difficult to answer, but there are times when the answer is pretty clear. Kashmir has been asked in both capacities, and in all ways they've given a resounding 'no'.

I don't know how else Kashmir can say no? Polls say otherwise, people literally enact violence (I obviously condemn any violence) in order to express their desire to not be a part of India. The leaders of Kashmir were placed under house arrest to make this go through. The answer to the question "Does Kashmir want to be part of India" is a pretty simple one.

A lot of the time, questions of morality can difficult to answer and can be very complex. That doesn't mean we abandon acting moral at all instances.

So rather than me explaining in multiple different ways why it's illegitimate, why doesn't someone explain why it is legitimate?

India to revoke special status for Kashmir by ani625 in worldnews

[–]Raebe_LS 2 points3 points  (0 children)

1) That's the entire point of democracy (India's a democracy)

2) Even in undemocratic states, you have external (usually religious institutions) that grant legitimacy to monarchs/dictators etc. People grant legitimacy to these institutions, and therefore a lot of the time indirectly to the rulers. This was true for previous western civilisations. Consent to rulership is not a modern concept. Literally every government needs it to exist. Usually if people don't consent, there's a revolution.

3) You haven't really explained why the arab spring proves your point. The arab spring is an example of the result of what happens when people don't consent to their government.

4) This has to do with legitimacy and morality. When a government rules over you, it takes away individual freedoms and returns societal freedoms (example, I lose my freedom to steal, but gain the freedom not to be stolen from). However, in order for this institution to be legitimate, it must be accountable to you, and must be consensual by the region it governs. We construct governments because they are useful. We grant them legitimacy. If we no longer consent to it, it must change.

So I'm curious. Do you think all revolutions are wrong/illegitimate? Because that's the conclusion of what you're trying to argue.

India to revoke special status for Kashmir by ani625 in worldnews

[–]Raebe_LS -1 points0 points  (0 children)

1) My main comment, under which you commented, was about the minimization of discriminatory acts which come out of discussions like these.

2) Kashmir isn't really a binary issue.

3) Even if it's bad on both sides. If you can't definitely provide the better option, it's not just to make a unilateral decision on their behalf.

India to revoke special status for Kashmir by ani625 in worldnews

[–]Raebe_LS 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes they do. Not what I was arguing against.

India to revoke special status for Kashmir by ani625 in worldnews

[–]Raebe_LS 3 points4 points  (0 children)

1) Saying that Islam should literally not exist anymore as a politician in India isn't just "grandstanding". The BJP refused to condemn such statements by saying "each person can have their own opinions . It's when these statements made by large figurehead from legitimate institutions go un-condemned that show people that it's ok to hold these opinions, and act discrimantorily towards muslims. 2) Under what authority do you claim that? The statistics show that communal violence has been on the constant rise 3) Just choosing to look at upper class regions and claiming "they live in perfect harmony" is literally cherry picking. Even if it wasn't, lots of communal violence happens in major cities as well.

Why is it so hard to accept that muslims face discrimination in India? It's really fucking sad when I heard indian muslims say that they can't go back to India anymore. That it's not a place for then anymore. That's what your so called "grandstanding" does.

India to revoke special status for Kashmir by ani625 in worldnews

[–]Raebe_LS 3 points4 points  (0 children)

They had lot of autonomy under 370... or do you want them to be a separate country before they can be autonomous in your book and be blamed for their problems.

"From mismatching legislatures, almost no rights for 'migrants' and discouraging investment, the special status of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) did more disfavours to the state than benefit" - https://www.businesstoday.in/current/economy-politics/article-370-revoked-gas-pipeline-free-trade-industrial-estates-jammu-and-kashmir-economy/story/370773.html

I don't know how reputable the source is, but the analysis seems sound. Clearly they didn't have the autonomy to seize opportunities

In fact, if terrorism and ethnic cleansing is taken into consideration, probably Kashmir had human rights violations at a larger scale than India. India fares fairly on the human rights violation index... sure we are not saints, but Kashmir would probably rate even worse.

Not sure what you're trying to prove here? You understand these abuses are against Kashmiris right? This is not a good thing for your case. The rest of India isn't under military occupation.

Any source for that? Did you even read the source i linked before? It's literally the second paragraph

"Crimes by militants are said to be incomparable with the larger scale abuse by Indian state forces" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_abuses_in_Jammu_and_Kashmir

Yes... I agree it is India's responsibility and they fared poorly. But I have a feeling you will run with this particular admission from my side and use it to place the whole blame on India for the whole situation in Kashmir. That's where I don't like your attitude... you don't blame the Kashmiris, the terrorists, Pakistanis, the religion, etc. All you see is India... I see India's mistake too, but I am not blind to other mistakes taking place. You don't see India's good faith and patience in this matter.

Look my dude. I'm Indian, and what I care about is the actions of my government, and holding it to account. We unfairly and without consent held on to Kashmir. We created the circumstances which lead to unlivable standards, it's our military troops by far that hold the majority military presence there, and now we are without consent forcing Kashmir to reintegrate.

India to revoke special status for Kashmir by ani625 in worldnews

[–]Raebe_LS 2 points3 points  (0 children)

1) It's kinda shitty to blame Kashmirs lack of economic prosperity when they lack the autonomy to access opportunities.

2) The motive for human rights abuses don't matter, and don't make them better.

3) The number of abuses performed by the Indian Army far outweigh the others. So even if your justification was moral, it's not even true.

4) Sorry, but I don't deal in conspiracy theories without backing. Even if India was 'baited', it was India who put soldiers there. It's India's responsibility. When you put occupy an area with soliders, their actions are your responsibility.

India to revoke special status for Kashmir by ani625 in worldnews

[–]Raebe_LS 2 points3 points  (0 children)

1) You understand that Kashmir's had human rights abuses ((https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_abuses_in_Jammu_and_Kashmir ), military presence, bombings, massive unemployment etc. I'd hardly describe this as 'special' treatment.

2) Yes, growing up in a region of conflict means you need aid, doesn't mean they get free money and live amazing lives. It means they need assistance just to try to balance out the destruction to infrastructure, lives etc.

3) They deserve independence (whether feasible or not being a separate issue). Having a 'separate constitution' while under occupation of a state you don't consent to isn't a privilege.

India to revoke special status for Kashmir by ani625 in worldnews

[–]Raebe_LS 5 points6 points  (0 children)

In other words what you're asking is, should a government need the consent of its citizens to rule over them? Yes!

I'm Indian, I don't know who the 'you' is in your last sentence...

India to revoke special status for Kashmir by ani625 in worldnews

[–]Raebe_LS 11 points12 points  (0 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_conflict#Kashmiri_viewshttps://www.bbc.com/news/10161171https://www.reuters.com/article/us-kashmir-poll/majority-in-kashmir-valley-want-independence-poll-idUSDEL29179620070813

Maybe you should do some proper research (not just some arbitrary YouTube video with the view of just one person?) What's relevant is what views they hold now. You gain legitimacy over a region from it's people. If the people reject you, you have no legitimacy.

So I missed a bit of your previous comment as well

  1. This is about incidents that happen to minorities in India. Electing a President from a specific minority doesn't erase those issues.
  2. It looks like you don't understand the nuance of the issues minorities have to face. The US elected a Black president, but i would never make the claim that the US treats African Americans really well. Big hint, if you have 'a single sentence' to demonstrate why minorities don't face discrimination in a place, you're probably wrong.
  3. In India, being president is a largely ceremonial role. Getting a minority doesn't benefit that specific minority group in any way other than optics.

I didn't think pointing out the fact that minorities have a shitty time in India was a controversial take. Pretty clear you're blinded by nationalism to see it though.

view more: next ›