Geek humor

[Horace]

The utility of the rote mechanics was that anybody could memorize them, and then everybody "knew math". I wonder if you run up against intellectual ability barriers in attempts to teach the ideas.

[Doctor Phibes]

@Horace said in Geek humor:

The utility of the rote mechanics was that anybody could memorize them, and then everybody "knew math".

I once taught a set-7 math class. Forget long-division, half of them could barely use a ruler.

[jon-nyc]

@Horace said in Geek humor:

The utility of the rote mechanics was that anybody could memorize them, and then everybody "knew math". I wonder if you run up against intellectual ability barriers in attempts to teach the ideas.

I think they very much do. They teach multiple methods to arrive at solutions really admiring the problem in many ways. My son has flourished with it, I’ve always thought it was a special kind of torture for the mathphobic.

[Copper]

My rote learning of multiplication tables has served me well over the last 60 years.

[Doctor Phibes]

@Copper said in Geek humor:

My rote learning of multiplication tables has served me well over the last 60 years.

So has my memorization of the Nicene Creed.

[Copper]

And the Pater Noster

[Axtremus]

Re: “rote learning of multiplication tables”

It’s really just caching for some frequently used information. Some information is more frequently needed than others, so it’s worthwhile to commit them to memory for quick access rather than to recompute or re-lookup every time the information is needed.

[jon-nyc]

[Horace]

@jon-nyc said in Geek humor:

Would be cool to live in a time when caricaturists were indistinguishable from portraitists.

[jon-nyc]

Not one, but two Sisyphus jokes.

[jon-nyc]

I wanted to add a third but it was an uphill climb.

[Aqua Letifer]

@jon-nyc said in Geek humor:

I wanted to add a third but it was an uphill climb.

Please. I can't bear the burden of another bad pun.

[LuFins Dad]

@jon-nyc said in Geek humor:

I wanted to add a third but it was an uphill climb.

You just need to be boulder,

[Nunatax]

This thread is going downhill fast…

[jon-nyc]

[mark]

[jon-nyc]

@mark lol

[Catseye3]

@mark Funny! But it can't qualify as geek, on account of I understood it.

Okay, maybe geek junior grade . . .

[Klaus]

Time for some CT jokes.

Once I was thinking what the category of my ex-girlfriends should be. Then I realized I was treating women as objects.

[Klaus]

Let C be a category. Let X,Y∈C be objects. Assume that the induced representable presheaves Hom(⋅,X) and Hom(⋅,Y) are naturally isomorphic. Then how do you prove that X and Y are themselves isomorphic? Yo ned a lemma for that.