Porn on the internet, just like everybody else.
If I’m reading this correctly, then an orgy isn’t an orgy if there is at least one person not fucking. This means that a single camera person not getting any turns what could be an orgy into just a set of sets of people fucking.
No, it just means that the camera person doesn’t belong to the subset of H that makes up the orgy. You can have an orgy in the same room as someone who isn’t fucking - proximity isn’t an issue.
Fun fact: Will I. Fuck is actually the maternal grandfather of Black Eyed Peas member Will I. Am, by way of his mother, Anita Good Fuck
I really need to refresh my set theory symbols. I haven’t taken that class in… oh no… Almost 30 years
I understand at least 20% of text, upvote. This is how much obscurity tolerance is needed to enjoy memes over here.
Doesn’t matter, read fuck.
I don’t like how the pairs $(h, h^‘)$ are implicitly the same as $(h^’, h)$. I think the post confuses the pairs with small sets. Normally, order matters in a pair.
The formatting on your comment seems have gotten a little messed up, so appologies if I’ve missed your point, but the paper seems quite specific that the pair
(h,h')is not equivalent to(h',h), especially in term of Def 1. For instance, the result off(h,h')may be positive while the result off(h',h)is negative or zero.The formatting you’re seeing is controlled by carets (^). Just replace the start and end of the superscript text with them.
I see this often when talking about exponents: x^2 is less than x^3.
The superscript needs to be surrounded to work properly: x(x+1) is greater than x(x-1).
In this case, the effected text is $(h, h^‘)$ and $(h^’, h)$. I’m not sure why the prime notation needs to be superscripted, probably something to do with the formatter that is expectinng $s. I think the correct formatting (at least for me) is (h, h’) and (h’, h).
Thank god I just took my set theory course
Ha! Also, small world, OOP is a friend of a friend.
