You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Locaha comments on Group Rationality Diary, July 1-15 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: therufs 03 July 2013 01:44AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (35)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Locaha 03 July 2013 03:08:06PM 0 points [-]

I have this crazy idea to use Anki to learn the multiplication table to 100x100, to be able to multiply large numbers fast. The only problem is, it seems both pointless and impossible, :-)

Comment author: Plasmon 03 July 2013 04:53:59PM 3 points [-]

Have a look at this blog post where, among other things, some kind of return-on-investment is calculated for learning multiplication tables further than 10x10.

Comment author: Locaha 03 July 2013 05:56:07PM 0 points [-]

Awesome, thanks.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 04 July 2013 05:01:16AM 1 point [-]

I was expected to learn decimal equivalents for fractions up to 1/9 (including 2/9 etc.), and I use them now and then.

Instead of working on the higher multiplication tables, why not learn methods of approximation?

Comment author: Locaha 05 July 2013 06:21:57AM 0 points [-]

Funny that you mention fractions, I started learning them a week ago. Though I can't say I even encountered decimal 1/7 in real life...

Comment author: Kindly 05 July 2013 03:24:21PM 1 point [-]

If you read a comment on LW that's downvoted to -5 and says "14% positive" this means it's received 1 upvote out of 7 total.

If you remember all of the repeating digits (142857) then you can also identify 28%, 42%, 57%, 71%, and 85% as 2/7, 3/7, 4/7, 5/7, and 6/7, respectively.

Comment author: wedrifid 03 July 2013 04:25:20PM 1 point [-]

I have this crazy idea to use Anki to learn the multiplication table to 100x100, to be able to multiply large numbers fast. The only problem is, it seems both pointless and impossible, :-)

That's not impossible. Not particularly worthwhile but possible.