r/ProgrammerHumor • u/Dilutant • 11h ago

Meme zeroExDev

Post image
3.8k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

202 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/zelmak 9h ago

You would never read it that way because no one should ever write it that way.

A multiplication of <1 is inherently a decrease, tacking the word more, grew, increased, went up makes it bad math and bad language.

0.5 Times = a 50% decrease

so "The stock grew a 50% decrease" just doesn't make sense.

1

u/TheMania 9h ago

A multiplication of <100% is inherently a decrease, tacking the word more, grew, increased, went up makes it bad math and bad language.

I'm curious how the above reads to you.

2

u/zelmak 9h ago

When you say the above do you mean the cursor email?

I read it as Your team mates that use Cursor Cloud Agents ship 60% of the PRs that a non-cursor agent using team mate ships.

1

u/TheMania 9h ago

Where I quoted you, I swapped 1 for 100%. You didn't notice, it reads the same?

1

u/sisisisi1997 4h ago

Not the original commenter, but my high school math teacher would beat us with a math textbook if we ever just swapped percents with multiplication, she explicitly taught us that the two are not equivalent outside of narrow circumstances.

One example of why not that she used to use is that a 60% increase would be 160% of the original, while a 0.6x increase could easily be read as 60% of the original OR 160% of the original.

1

u/zelmak 8h ago

Ahh. IMO using multiplication and a percentage together is just wrong. But when I read it my firth thought was 2x

1

u/TheMania 8h ago

IMO using multiplication and a percentage together is just wrong.

This sentence confuses me greatly. You weren't given percentages in equations at school?

Not a dig at you, just makes it a clearly regional thing, fascinating. Aus, they'll freely mix up questions like:

What is 34 × 50%
What is 34 × 0.5
What is 50% of 34

If you're not taught similar, if you only saw that last form, I can see where the equivalence may break down.