• 0 Posts
  • 70 Comments
Joined 2 年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年7月19日

help-circle




  • CallumWells@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlJust sayin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 年前

    Not sure if you actually meant logarithmic or exponential. An exponential tax rate would mean that the more you own the next unit of value would be a lot more in tax, while a logarithmic tax rate would mean that the more you own the next unit of value would be a lot less in tax. See x2 versus log2(x) (or any logarithm base, really). The exponential (x2) would start slow and then increase fast, and the logarithmic one would start increasing fast and then go into increasing slowly.

    https://www.desmos.com/calculator/7l1turktmc










  • CallumWells@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlWhich pill do you choose?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 年前

    Except it doesn’t specify that you go back in time to when you were 6 years old, but that you “restart your life at 6 years of age” so a fairly reasonable interpretation would be that you’ll be a 6 year old in 2024. Monkeys paw and all that.

    Now, I personally think it’s more interesting if it did mean that you went back in time.



  • CallumWells@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mltitle
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 年前

    I disagree that we shouldn’t constrain the use of words to their definitions. It’s what helps make the meaning of sentences the most clear for everyone. If people had actually done that then the definition of “literally” wouldn’t include “figuratively” and a lot of misunderstandings could be avoided.

    Otherwise we could end up with people saying that when they wrote “all white people deserve to die” what they actually meant was that they deserve to live, since that’s how they use the word “die”. It’s nonsensical to me.



  • CallumWells@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mltitle
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 年前

    Interestingly enough, in old English you had “werman” and “wifman” for man and woman respectively, in which case referring to all with “mankind” makes perfect sense. So the originator for mankind seems more likely to be from that than the explanation that it’s a shortening of “humankind” to me.