• Primarily0617@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    a natural reading of 2(2+2) treats it as the same

    you’re straight up just spouting contradictory nonsense now because you’ve realised your stance doesn’t make any sense, and i am very much here for it

    • LopensLeftArm@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      No, what I’m explaining to you is the facts behind what every calculator with any modicum of computing power will tell you, namely that 2(2+2) is identical to 2×(2+2).

        • LopensLeftArm@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yeah, kind of. The crappier calculator is the one generating the incorrect answer. Any calculator with any real level of oomph behind it can parse this correctly to get the correct answer, 16.

            • LopensLeftArm@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              The good calculator is the one using the processing power of the phone to handle the programming necessary to correctly interpret the order of operations and arrive at the correct answer, whereas the bad calculator - despite having no ads - is a cheap piece of trash unable to contain the necessary computational logic to arrive at the correct answer.