Don’t forget the fact that despite it’s just a cheeseburger, it’s named “The Vonderbilt Wonder”, “Halfsie Pattsies”, or “Edmonton the Second”. Ideally on a menu so scant on details it’s hard to tell the french fries from the extra avocado.
There is a legal answer to the question, and the answer is yes, it would continue to be the same ship, at least according to Lloyds of London.
In philosophical terms, also the same boat. It has continued to exit as something we would recognise as a ship throughout, and has not been modified, merely repaired.
I was searching how to cast the screen on an Android phone through USB yesterday, and I had to go through pages of “free” Play Store apps and their shitty tutorials, some of which I downloaded, (one had 50 million downloads) two of which were identical skins of each other that wanted payment information and charged $20 a month after a week long trial, to eventually find out it’s a default included option on any Samsung phone and can be found in some settings. Google search has completely gone to shit.
The cool thing about star trek is I can pretend I knew that and am speaking from the perspective of Discovery in the 29th century or something and still be technically correct, the best kind of correct.
One day, while working on a website, I was wondering how to calculate a specific point in a graph. After googling, the answer was by using sine and cosine. Mind blew away, I had always thought I’d never use them.
That “modern embellishment” is not a great example. It changes the context of the ship’s existence from a physical entity to a legal entity. I like the thought experiment but if you keep changing basic definitions it will get you less than nowhere
The literal joke is that the article has become an example of the very thing it describes, and perhaps a better example than the modern embellishment example
1209 is 3 times 13 times 31, and cats are better at typing than they are at math.
In base 10, the sum of the digits of any number that is divisible by 3 is also divisible by 3, so 1+2+0+9=12, implies 1209 is divisible by 3.
Likewise, 1001 is divisible by 13, so if you split a number in base 10 every 3 digits, and subtract/add alternating sets of numbers, if the result is divisible by 13, the original number is, too. 209-1 is 208, which is obviously divisible by 13, so 1209 is, too.
Divisibility by 31 in base 10 is harder to check, but 999998 is divisible by 31, as is 999999999999999, so you can just split the number every 15 digits, and add those together, and if the sum is divisible by 31… I’m talking about math to a cat.
lemmy.world
Hot