The Picard Maneuver@lemmy.worldM to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 天前He's an arboristlemmy.worldimagemessage-square125linkfedilinkarrow-up1635arrow-down16
arrow-up1629arrow-down1imageHe's an arboristlemmy.worldThe Picard Maneuver@lemmy.worldM to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 天前message-square125linkfedilink
minus-squareTess@piefed.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up50·2 天前Half as much as they have measured, is my guess.
minus-squareFinjaminPoach@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up6arrow-down1·2 天前THIS ia getting philosophical… i mean, first of all, things don’t need to be cut perfectly in half every time they’re cut. But then your answer is probably an estimate/approximation. HOWEVER… when you cut one piece of wood into two, is not 100% of the wood cut into? So either this carpenter measures 50% of his wood aimlessly, or you, sir, are a LIAR
minus-squaretryitout@infosec.publinkfedilinkarrow-up10·2 天前I believe they were alluding to “measure twice, cut once”
minus-squareBaŝto@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 天前This isn’t about measuring it so wrong that the number gets larger than it sheuld be?
minus-squarenumerator3962@fedinsfw.applinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8arrow-down1·2 天前Measure twice, cut once
Half as much as they have measured, is my guess.
THIS ia getting philosophical… i mean, first of all, things don’t need to be cut perfectly in half every time they’re cut.
But then your answer is probably an estimate/approximation.
HOWEVER… when you cut one piece of wood into two, is not 100% of the wood cut into?
So either this carpenter measures 50% of his wood aimlessly, or you, sir, are a LIAR
I believe they were alluding to “measure twice, cut once”
🫠 I concede
This isn’t about measuring it so wrong that the number gets larger than it sheuld be?
Measure twice, cut once