@NovaGN1@JackTipGuin@HowIMineFish They had access to class notes, google, the textbook, and more than enough example problems on the internet. We know they’re smart enough since they’re in the top half of the class on the final.
@sirchadius@HowIMineFish All we know is they didn’t use AI. Take home tests for me were usually under homework rules minus collaboration, so the internet, textbooks etc were fair game. They’re clearly bright by being in an Ivy League math econ class, so they could figure it out given enough time.
@NovaGN1@JackTipGuin@HowIMineFish He’s not even below average! He’s in the top half of his class going off the final but didn’t spend the time on the take home he should have. Props for clearly not using AI but he could have gotten a much better midterm score if he spent more time on it.
@JackTipGuin@HowIMineFish If you get a grade that low on a take home it’s either because you just don’t care or can’t be assed to go through the textbook/google to find the right answers.
@modernmaegor The graph doesn’t reflect the rate at which new couples meet, only how they met. People are meeting more online than in other spaces while the total is still going down. The internet competes with outside activities where relationships could form. Banning it is still a bad idea.
@olivecider776 They automatically have more depth because the writers had to think about how their parent (often more one note) affected them in addition to whatever personality quirk they have. It doesn’t go both ways bc time travel/deep realms.
@Nicke55147706@MrHarryCole The Vikings were absolutely colonizers and raiders in addition to traders. You’ve fallen into the trap where history educators emphasize the more benign aspects of a culture to contrast with popular perception, and the students dismiss said perception as pure propaganda.
@Majora__Z@MariGO2thepolls Might just be my education in California public schools but we spent about as much time on precolumbian America as medieval Europe in my world history class
@_coolguy5000@Scarecrohh I could see it be similar to Awakening as one of the first games people would argue it’s worth buying the system for (assuming it’s good)
@_coolguy5000@Scarecrohh $60 in 2019 is equivalent to $78 today, so the digital version is cheaper in real terms than 3H was. It’s still probably gonna hurt sales because $60 was the standard in 2019 while FW’s price tag hasn’t settled yet and the switch 2 has a smaller user base bc no Mario/Zelda/smash.