Getting the question wrong is one issue, but I think solving it in 3 seconds without any kind of primer/context-setting question would require superior intellect.
@@dinklebob1 I thought 3 seconds was quite reasonable. Just looking at the thumbnail, I was already reading it as "9 - 1 + 3" without even thinking, so all I had to spend time on was the addition.
@@MaskOfCinder Well, I didn't time myself. But I got it pretty fast. I would say it took me five seconds. But I was also being pretty careful because I assumed it was a trick question. I think it's possible I could have arrived at the answer in 3 seconds had I known there was a time limit. And I'm not a genius, as far as I know.
I would have told the interviewer, "I don't think this job is a good fit for me. I prefer giving correct answers over meeting arbitrary deadlines." Keep in mind, interviews work both ways. They've just given you an insight into how management thinks.
When you get 11 but did not time yourself so you think….. “man that was probably 4-5 seconds”, but now are doomed to eternal torment of not knowing if you got the job or not 😂
“Modern” ? I was taught that order of operations 50 years ago my someone who was my current age at the time. So the “modern” interpretation has been employed for at least a century now.
@@Blade.5786 Depends on the job. Like maybe NASA? where there may be a crisis with limited time and you need to correctly determine a probes trajectory (using math) so you can safely guide it around the spacestation without smashing into it while also not sending the million dollar probe out of orbit and lost forever.
I like to think that I’m very mathematically minded, but there is no way that I could solve this in just 3 seconds; I’d almost certainly panic and make a mistake. Perhaps one person in a thousand could pull it off.
I agree wholeheartedly. Even though I'm pretty good at math, I would absolutely screw up if I was given just 3 seconds. I don't even understand what skill this interview question aims to find. Thinking quickly? Working calmly under pressure? Either way, this just seems like a way to eliminate potentially great candidates who don't have some arbitrary skill like solving a math problem with intentionally bad notation in 3 seconds.
It's a problem where people who are foolish will get the wrong answer, and people who are smart will say, "There is a blatant error in how it's presented," and not get any answer in time, which filters so that the only people who get through are midwits. ...Actually, it makes sense that a hiring interviewer might want to use the question.
It's so nice to see somebody who's honest, I would have gotten this wrong, and my excuse is that I've been out of school for 18 years, and this kind of thing doesn't come up in real life.
I said to myself, "this must be testing for proficiency in the application of the order of operations." Took me 7 seconds to arrive at the correct answer. Not hired.
I don't believe. The CEO would be hiring himself either. No way there's many people see this and can instantly get the answer. He's not going to be hiring to many people and should fire himself.
I'd have to watch the video again to be sure, but I don't think it said the CEO gave a 3 sec time limit. I think that was added afterwards when the problem was on social media.
3 seconds is only hard part, when you are stressed, read question carefully and there is no time for that. It took me little bit more than 5 sec. It is level of 2nd class elementary school (8 y/o kids).
I want to know what kind of job is it where doing a silly order of operations sequence in 3 seconds makes you more able to do the job than solving the same sequence in 4 seconds.
I find the order of operations quite straightforward, but I am not quick at mental arithmetic. It took me quite a bit longer than 3 seconds to decide the correct answer was 11, although perhaps that's because I run through everything more than once to double check I'm getting the same answer every time and haven't made a mistake.
@@neutronenstern. Yes it is. You can’t check your work for an equation like this in less than two seconds. You couldn’t even explain the equation in that short of time.
In a sufficiently large company, the CEO isn't doing any interviewing, except maybe for another C-level role. If I were being interviewed by that guy for such a role, I'd find this kind of question a little suspicious.
When I was in college in the 90's, there was a movement to seperate the meaning of the ÷ and / symbols. In the equation 3×3-3÷3+3 would be 11, but in 3×3-3/3+3 would indeed be 1.
I've always hated these order of operations "puzzles". They aren't designed to be interesting nor challenging, but simply to guarantee engagement on social media, because the answer is subject to a (potentially) changing interpretation. And we all know how much people love to aimlessly squabble and bicker!
No actual mathematician, or anybody using mathematics for any kind of useful work, would ever write an equation like this. So this would tell me straight away that the company is not worth working for. I'd walk out of the interview.
Conveniently, if we forget those currently at school, there are three types of person in this world. Those who went to school, those who didn’t go to school, and those who will disagree to troll on the internet. The answer is 11, the rules are simple.
I did end up getting the answer almost instantaneously. It being labeled a brain teaser is a little weird. However, 3 seconds might be a tad short, maybe under 10 seconds with enough to time to process the entire thing without mistakes. I learned it as PEMDAS. However, it took me a little longer to remember that if the priority is the same, go left to right instead of multiply then divide and add then subtract.
For my job interview, they asked me what was the forces that applies to a mining tire and how to define its energy efficiency ... and they didn't consider that it was a question for a genius. I'd like to know what kind of CEO can ask such a trivial question ?!
3:25 this is why my teacher in school taught PEMA instead of PEMDAS - to emphasize that multiplication and division have the same priority, and that addition and subtraction have the same priority
As an Electrical Engineer graduate this was not a trick question😂. Edit: I've had to transpose so many formulas to solve problems like torque, speed, magneticflux, transformer efficiency and losses and so many more. Order of operations is vital for transposing such formulas
3 seconds? It takes already 3s to properly read the question! Maybe it is indeed a „trick question“, and the CIO wants to see if the applicant is someone having the guts to tell when something is impossible to do? if he then wants someone with guts or avoid them - we will never know 🤷♀️
I hate these kinds of problems. Though ugly, these ambiguities can be solved by simply using parentheses. Or better yet, just use the fraction bar instead of the division sign, which causes the confusion the most.
CEO interviewing the candidates himself with a "trick question". Yes, Mahipal of Hindustan Times, we believe you can do it in 3 seconds, double the time that took you to compose the article
To everyone saying they should have used brackets, it would be Redundant to those who understand pemdas. This is not a remedial course. ~Ms Ling, Calc II
Thanks to my grade school teacher for teaching me: Mini-Dresses-Are-Short to learn the order of operations. Yes I was able to get the answer of 11 in about 3 seconds. Thanks for sharing.
I always thought that the addition-subtraction was part of the order, same with multiplications before division. But it's good to be reminded that it's left to right with those groups.
It depends on context and what you normally use for operators I use . for the higher precedence multiplication, and I use / for the higher precedence division I often use the X and ./. for …) x (… And …) / (… So there are four operators, not 2 just drawn differently. That’s why 3 x 3 - 3 would mean 3(3-3) Whereas 3.3 - 3 Wild be (3 x 3) - 3 If you think that’s unconventional, well it is unambiguous to me, and I’ve being doing it for decades.
Please, I emplore you. Stop this Pemdas stuff. It is the 100% responsibility of the questioner to ask the question unambiguously. Pemdas is for clicks only.
As an older guy, I get tripped up at times by the division symbol depending on how a problem is written. I did get this video's problem within 3 seconds, though. But we were taught differently back in the day.
If that was really a CEO interview, my 2nd point would be (after saying "11"): whoever gave you this should not work in your company. By standard, you add parentheses to remove any possible confusion, like you would remove most points of confusion in a presentation. If this is how your employees work, I can't imagine the amount of slack and lack of professionalism in the company. Points of confusion in Finance, QA, Marketing/Market analysis, Sales and ops are extremely common, and the last thing a team needs is to spend time on a point of confusion that could be easily avoided. Be clear, be concise, and ensure that the rest of the team can work together to deliver on objectives. There are many more ways to test the mental agility of an employee than playing on confusing set-up.
3x3=9 3/3=1 9-1=8 8+3=11 To be completely honest, no I couldn't solve in 3 seconds. It took me 5 or 6 seconds. Everything above was typed after seeing the problem and pausing the video before watching the solution and 2 answers that are considered to be incorrect, so the first 4 lines are pretty much redundant to anyone who has already watched the video and seen the solution. I will add that the second incorrect answer is one I could be persuaded to accept if we were still living in the typewriter's glory days, but I can't accept that 1 is a correct answer anymore now that we're near the end of 2024.
I just do wonder how people mess up with stuff u should have learned and never forgot in around 3rd-6th grad in school .. what did ur teacher has done the whole time ?? Good and easy video. appreciate ur work.
This is definitely an easy problem, but the issue is that having only 3 seconds will cause people to panic and answer wrong. I don't even think 3 seconds is enough time for most people to solve a problem like this even if they know it's coming. I think 7 seconds or something similar would at least be more reasonable.
Not as tricky as it looks of course if you know your operations but I do enjoy all the wrong/different answers that come up. It helps to hear people's reasoning.
While I was able to quickly solve it (working with computer languages for 30 years makes it easier) I wouldn’t work for someone who asks such a question with such a deadline. I’d answer, and then ask my own question: Does this role ever need me to answer this question or similar question in 3 seconds? 0:26
The second argument "everything to the left of the division symbol is divided by everything to the right of the symbol" fails if you have more than one division symbol in the same line.
Very easy to solve but solving it in 3 seconds is absolutely ridiculous. Took me a little less than a minute. I’d be willing to bet even most mathematicians wouldn’t be able to solve this in only 3 seconds.
The correct answer is "This is written in ambiguous notation such that it will confuse a large subset of readers, leading to incorrect answers. As a member of this team I will maintain clear communication without room for speculation or interpretation so that work is completed efficiently and correctly, unlike this problem. Also it's 11."
2:34 1 month ago, you made a video about 'half of 2+2' and you said in the meaning 1/2*(2+2) it should be pronounced 'half of the sum 2+2'. So shouldn't this be 'all divided by the sum 3+3'?
It took me 3 seconds to read “only for genius” and then another 30 seconds to realize it was not talking about a person named “genius” or that there was 1 specific genius who the problem was for… then 3 seconds to do the math problem lol
I cannot imagine wanting the sort of job where this sort of knowledge would be remotely relevant. I have a language degree, and was a qualified lawyer and part-time judge. Arithmetic never entered into it.
Can I just point out how this question -seems to always- so often produce positive whole numbers, -no matter how badly- even when you mess it up? That's a pretty interesting feature I think. EDIT: updated for all my fellow disagreeable showoffs :)
I blame homeschooling and modern "revolutionary" thinking for people not being able to do basic math reasoning like this. I think Presh should do a video like this where he visualizes PEMDAS with money so people who think the answer here is 5 or 1 can understand that their incorrect methods are literally costing them.
The answer is obviously 5. BODMAS 3x3-3÷3+3 =9-1+3 =9-4 =5 Cause addition is done before subtraction! Btw, this is obviously wrong, please do not make this mistake ever.
@louisepeterson6626 it's funny cause doing the whole thing entirely from left to right ignoring the order of operations also gives 5. I wonder if it's just a coincidence or there's actually a theorem out there that explains this phenomenon
@@hikari1690 It's just coincidence, there is no theorem. It is easily shown that the phenomenon that (((n × n) - n) ÷ n) + n gives the same result as (n × n) - ((n ÷ n) + n) only works for n = 3 and n = 0 .
@@yurenchu I'm almost certain it won't work when n=0. But eh, that's fair. If I've learnt anything from binge watching 3b1b, it's that patterns don't hold unless you can prove it does
@@hikari1690 LOL! You're correct! Sorry, I didn't check my answer. I merely set both expressions as equal and then solved the resulting quadratic for n . I forgot that both expressions involve division by n . Both expressions approach -1 as their limit when n approaches 0 .
To make this even more confusing. The calculator app in windows... when in Standard Mode, it calculates from left to right; when in Scientific Mode, it calculates in the order of operations. Good luch trying to explain that to someone who is not very proficient in math.
Modern maths nowadays means typewriter notation, which means you need brackets to show what you mean. The horizontal fraction line will make it obvious when writing it down on, for example, the blackboard in yesteryear's schools. Either a short line between the third and fourth 3 or a long line between the first three and the two last ones. So, in "classic" maths, the answer is 1.
Let's face it, the hardest part is to quickly figure out what 8+3 is.
Uhmm, I don't have any trouble doing it...
I stalled for 1 second to figure out what 8+3 was
I am getting 9+2 😂
Oh I can do that! The answer is 1!
I solved it the moment I saw it so I don't know how long it took me 😢
Whenever an order of operations problem "goes viral" I regret being a part of this world.
Guess you are vaccinated against this virus
Presh has been posting these for years. Apparently these are supposed to make good math videos. I strongly disagree.
It's somewhat disheartening that anyone would think this expression is "genius"-level. 😞
@@alhypo The difficulty is the time limit not the equation.
It's not really "genius" level unless it's accompanied by a picture of Albert Einstein.
Getting the question wrong is one issue, but I think solving it in 3 seconds without any kind of primer/context-setting question would require superior intellect.
@@dinklebob1 I thought 3 seconds was quite reasonable. Just looking at the thumbnail, I was already reading it as "9 - 1 + 3" without even thinking, so all I had to spend time on was the addition.
@@MaskOfCinder Well, I didn't time myself. But I got it pretty fast. I would say it took me five seconds. But I was also being pretty careful because I assumed it was a trick question.
I think it's possible I could have arrived at the answer in 3 seconds had I known there was a time limit. And I'm not a genius, as far as I know.
I would have told the interviewer, "I don't think this job is a good fit for me. I prefer giving correct answers over meeting arbitrary deadlines." Keep in mind, interviews work both ways. They've just given you an insight into how management thinks.
I agree, but only after giving him the correct answer first!
When you get 11 but did not time yourself so you think….. “man that was probably 4-5 seconds”, but now are doomed to eternal torment of not knowing if you got the job or not 😂
Same, I wish the video didn't spoil it in the thumbnail and only show the question for 3 seconds.
Same. 3.174 seconds here. No job :-(
For me it was over 3 seconds staring wondering why it was just for Genius. Before actually working out I had 3 seconds.
“Modern” ? I was taught that order of operations 50 years ago my someone who was my current age at the time. So the “modern” interpretation has been employed for at least a century now.
I really don't want a job where the interview questions are based on this skill level.
If you dont have such s basic skill level you ain't getting any tech job, thats the most basic stuff
@@abgvedr Nah answering a question like this in 3 seconds demonstrates nothing of use.
@@Blade.5786 Demonstrates how active your brain is
@@Blade.5786 Depends on the job. Like maybe NASA? where there may be a crisis with limited time and you need to correctly determine a probes trajectory (using math) so you can safely guide it around the spacestation without smashing into it while also not sending the million dollar probe out of orbit and lost forever.
It took more than three seconds just to read the equation. Then of course, it was easy. 11.
What job is this gonna get?
Imagine loosing your best potential candidate over this.
The next question is how to spell 'lose' 😅
I like to think that I’m very mathematically minded, but there is no way that I could solve this in just 3 seconds; I’d almost certainly panic and make a mistake. Perhaps one person in a thousand could pull it off.
I agree wholeheartedly. Even though I'm pretty good at math, I would absolutely screw up if I was given just 3 seconds. I don't even understand what skill this interview question aims to find. Thinking quickly? Working calmly under pressure? Either way, this just seems like a way to eliminate potentially great candidates who don't have some arbitrary skill like solving a math problem with intentionally bad notation in 3 seconds.
@@Glowing0v3rlord With 1000 ppl competing for this job, the best strategy would be to guess a random smallish integer. 1000 ppl guessing a #
It's a problem where people who are foolish will get the wrong answer, and people who are smart will say, "There is a blatant error in how it's presented," and not get any answer in time, which filters so that the only people who get through are midwits.
...Actually, it makes sense that a hiring interviewer might want to use the question.
It's so nice to see somebody who's honest, I would have gotten this wrong, and my excuse is that I've been out of school for 18 years, and this kind of thing doesn't come up in real life.
I will never know because I saw the question in the thumbnail, almost certainly for more than 3 seconds before I clicked it.
I said to myself, "this must be testing for proficiency in the application of the order of operations." Took me 7 seconds to arrive at the correct answer. Not hired.
I don't believe. The CEO would be hiring himself either. No way there's many people see this and can instantly get the answer. He's not going to be hiring to many people and should fire himself.
I'd have to watch the video again to be sure, but I don't think it said the CEO gave a 3 sec time limit. I think that was added afterwards when the problem was on social media.
3 seconds is only hard part, when you are stressed, read question carefully and there is no time for that. It took me little bit more than 5 sec. It is level of 2nd class elementary school (8 y/o kids).
Easy yes, 3 seconds no. 5 seconds, ok. (In an interview I'd start explaining my working before completing the answer).
At least this question doesn't suffer from notational ambiguity like most of the others.
My thoughts exactly
it is a bit ambiguous but not the level most of these have.
I want to know what kind of job is it where doing a silly order of operations sequence in 3 seconds makes you more able to do the job than solving the same sequence in 4 seconds.
For me the hard part is not to figure out that 3*3-3/3+3 is (3*3)-(3/3)+3 it's figuring out what 9-1+3 is lol
Darn, it took me 4 seconds. No job, but I never wanted to move to India in the first place.
I think we have failed when order of operations goes genius viral
I find the order of operations quite straightforward, but I am not quick at mental arithmetic. It took me quite a bit longer than 3 seconds to decide the correct answer was 11, although perhaps that's because I run through everything more than once to double check I'm getting the same answer every time and haven't made a mistake.
I still don't understand how anyone can get this wrong.
Someone who answers this in under 3 seconds hasn't double checked their work.
yea, but they still might get the right answer
if you do it in 1.5s you have enough time to double check.
@@neutronenstern. Even geniuses can’t check their work in 1.5 seconds.
@@MaskOfCinder idk.
its not hard work.
@@neutronenstern. Yes it is. You can’t check your work for an equation like this in less than two seconds. You couldn’t even explain the equation in that short of time.
In a sufficiently large company, the CEO isn't doing any interviewing, except maybe for another C-level role. If I were being interviewed by that guy for such a role, I'd find this kind of question a little suspicious.
I’m surprised no one tried to incorrectly factor the ‘3’ out of the equation first, leaving just 3(1x1-1/1+1) which would equal ‘3’
I got 11 but my brain doesn't work fast enough to get it in 3 seconds, it was more like 10 seconds.. LOL
When I was in college in the 90's, there was a movement to seperate the meaning of the ÷ and / symbols. In the equation 3×3-3÷3+3 would be 11, but in 3×3-3/3+3 would indeed be 1.
I've always hated these order of operations "puzzles". They aren't designed to be interesting nor challenging, but simply to guarantee engagement on social media, because the answer is subject to a (potentially) changing interpretation. And we all know how much people love to aimlessly squabble and bicker!
No actual mathematician, or anybody using mathematics for any kind of useful work, would ever write an equation like this. So this would tell me straight away that the company is not worth working for. I'd walk out of the interview.
Conveniently, if we forget those currently at school, there are three types of person in this world. Those who went to school, those who didn’t go to school, and those who will disagree to troll on the internet. The answer is 11, the rules are simple.
I did end up getting the answer almost instantaneously. It being labeled a brain teaser is a little weird.
However, 3 seconds might be a tad short, maybe under 10 seconds with enough to time to process the entire thing without mistakes.
I learned it as PEMDAS. However, it took me a little longer to remember that if the priority is the same, go left to right instead of multiply then divide and add then subtract.
For my job interview, they asked me what was the forces that applies to a mining tire and how to define its energy efficiency ... and they didn't consider that it was a question for a genius. I'd like to know what kind of CEO can ask such a trivial question ?!
If I had only 3 seconds to solve I would stare my boss directly in the eye and just say "3" because I'd assume it was a word puzzle.
3:25 this is why my teacher in school taught PEMA instead of PEMDAS - to emphasize that multiplication and division have the same priority, and that addition and subtraction have the same priority
I don't understand why it is so hard for people to understand that if you have same order of operations, you do them from left to right🙄
As an Electrical Engineer graduate this was not a trick question😂.
Edit: I've had to transpose so many formulas to solve problems like torque, speed, magneticflux, transformer efficiency and losses and so many more. Order of operations is vital for transposing such formulas
It's not though is it.. it's just for anyone that paid attention in high school.
Took me about 11 seconds. Buddy is going to be doing a lot of interviews if 3 seconds is the bar😅
It's Kinda amazing how something so simple can look so confusing
how is it confusing?
PEDMAS and BODMAS...sure, but am I the only one that learned it as BEDMAS?
Brackets, Exponents...
Bracket
Over dividing
Multiplication
Addition
Subtraction
Bodmas.
That's how we were taught it in school in England in the 90s
That was just poor.
3 seconds? It takes already 3s to properly read the question! Maybe it is indeed a „trick question“, and the CIO wants to see if the applicant is someone having the guts to tell when something is impossible to do? if he then wants someone with guts or avoid them - we will never know 🤷♀️
I hate these kinds of problems. Though ugly, these ambiguities can be solved by simply using parentheses. Or better yet, just use the fraction bar instead of the division sign, which causes the confusion the most.
Back in the mid-90s when I was at uni, it was kind of an untold rule to not use that divide-by symbol.
actual 3rd grade math problem
CEO interviewing the candidates himself with a "trick question". Yes, Mahipal of Hindustan Times, we believe you can do it in 3 seconds, double the time that took you to compose the article
Anyone who thought about other answer than 11, most likely skipped way to many math classes or did not attempt at all. Those are the basics of math
That's why brackets are convenient. Preventing all those misinterpretations
Absolutely!
Keep in mind, when he says "modern", this isn't something new.
Yeah, I made this comment on another video. By "modern" he means within the last 1,000 years or so.
From the thumbnail:
0 = 3 × 3 - 3 - 3 - 3
1 = 3 ÷ 3 + (3 - 3) × 3
2 = (3 + 3) ÷ 3 + 3 - 3
3 = (3 - 3) ÷ (3 + 3) + 3
4 = 3 ÷ 3 + 3 + 3 - 3
5 = 3 × 3 - 3 ÷ 3 - 3
6 = (3 - 3) × 3 + 3 + 3
7 = 3 × 3 - (3 + 3) ÷ 3
8 = 3 + 3 + (3 + 3) ÷ 3
9 = 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 - 3
10 = 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 ÷ 3
*11 = 3 × 3 - 3 ÷ 3 + 3*
12 = 3 × 3 + 3 + 3 - 3
13 = 3 × 3 + 3 + 3 ÷ 3
14 = 3 × 3 + 3! - 3 ÷ 3
15 = 3 × 3 + 3 × 3 - 3
16 = (3 + 3) × 3 - 3! ÷ 3
17 = (3 + 3) × 3 - 3 ÷ 3
18 = (3 + 3) × 3 - 3 + 3
19 = (3 + 3) × 3 + 3 ÷ 3
20 = (3 + 3) × 3 + 3! ÷ 3
21 = 3 × (3 + 3 + 3 ÷ 3)
22 = 3! × 3 + 3 + 3 ÷ 3
23 = 3! × 3 + 3 + 3! ÷ 3
24 = 3 × (3 × 3 - 3 ÷ 3)
25 = 3 × 3 × 3 - 3! ÷ 3
26 = 3 × 3 × 3 - 3 ÷ 3
27 = 3 × 3 × 3 - 3 + 3
28 = 3 × 3 × 3 + 3 ÷ 3
29 = 3 × 3 × 3 + 3! ÷ 3
30 = (3 × 3 + 3 ÷ 3) × 3
31 = 3! × 3! - 3 - 3! ÷ 3
32 = 3! × 3! - 3 - 3 ÷ 3
33 = (3 + 3) × (3 + 3) - 3
It can be done in seconds but definitely not 3
To everyone saying they should have used brackets, it would be Redundant to those who understand pemdas.
This is not a remedial course.
~Ms Ling, Calc II
"Solve in 3 seconds"
Pressure Locker: Takes 5 min
Thanks to my grade school teacher for teaching me: Mini-Dresses-Are-Short to learn the order of operations. Yes I was able to get the answer of 11 in about 3 seconds. Thanks for sharing.
I always thought that the addition-subtraction was part of the order, same with multiplications before division. But it's good to be reminded that it's left to right with those groups.
It depends on context and what you normally use for operators
I use . for the higher precedence multiplication, and I use / for the higher precedence division
I often use the X and ./. for
…) x (…
And
…) / (…
So there are four operators, not 2 just drawn differently.
That’s why 3 x 3 - 3 would mean
3(3-3)
Whereas 3.3 - 3
Wild be (3 x 3) - 3
If you think that’s unconventional, well it is unambiguous to me, and I’ve being doing it for decades.
PEMDAS ❌
BODMAS❌
BEDMAS✅
Please, I emplore you. Stop this Pemdas stuff. It is the 100% responsibility of the questioner to ask the question unambiguously. Pemdas is for clicks only.
11
The answer is purple
Sorry, there were 11 likes and i made it 12 😂
You mean for people with basic math knowledge ?
Those font choice had me seeing half of those 3’s as 5’s for some reason.
As an older guy, I get tripped up at times by the division symbol depending on how a problem is written. I did get this video's problem within 3 seconds, though. But we were taught differently back in the day.
If that was really a CEO interview, my 2nd point would be (after saying "11"): whoever gave you this should not work in your company. By standard, you add parentheses to remove any possible confusion, like you would remove most points of confusion in a presentation. If this is how your employees work, I can't imagine the amount of slack and lack of professionalism in the company. Points of confusion in Finance, QA, Marketing/Market analysis, Sales and ops are extremely common, and the last thing a team needs is to spend time on a point of confusion that could be easily avoided. Be clear, be concise, and ensure that the rest of the team can work together to deliver on objectives.
There are many more ways to test the mental agility of an employee than playing on confusing set-up.
11. Doesn't make me a genius though.
What, knowing and being able to apply basic rules doesn't make you a genius?? /s
@@Steve_Stowers :D
3x3=9
3/3=1
9-1=8
8+3=11
To be completely honest, no I couldn't solve in 3 seconds. It took me 5 or 6 seconds.
Everything above was typed after seeing the problem and pausing the video before watching the solution and 2 answers that are considered to be incorrect, so the first 4 lines are pretty much redundant to anyone who has already watched the video and seen the solution.
I will add that the second incorrect answer is one I could be persuaded to accept if we were still living in the typewriter's glory days, but I can't accept that 1 is a correct answer anymore now that we're near the end of 2024.
Definitely got this at a glance. Very basic order of operations problem.
Over 8220 views. All from America! 🤣🤣🤣
I just dug up an old Sanyo (CX-2670) solar calculator from a dusty old box in the back of the shed. It gave an answer of 5.
It took me five seconds, because I checked my work a couple of times.
I just do wonder how people mess up with stuff u should have learned and never forgot in around 3rd-6th grad in school .. what did ur teacher has done the whole time ??
Good and easy video. appreciate ur work.
This is definitely an easy problem, but the issue is that having only 3 seconds will cause people to panic and answer wrong. I don't even think 3 seconds is enough time for most people to solve a problem like this even if they know it's coming. I think 7 seconds or something similar would at least be more reasonable.
@@Glowing0v3rlord ya okay in pov u are 100% right but mean more general bout easy math rules u will llearn in math around 3rd and 6th grad
Not as tricky as it looks of course if you know your operations but I do enjoy all the wrong/different answers that come up. It helps to hear people's reasoning.
While I was able to quickly solve it (working with computer languages for 30 years makes it easier) I wouldn’t work for someone who asks such a question with such a deadline. I’d answer, and then ask my own question: Does this role ever need me to answer this question or similar question in 3 seconds? 0:26
I guess to your average Joe Beercan, that is some genius level math.
When you are rushing you are going to make mistakes. People would likely solve it quicker if there was no time limit with a job on the line.
I got it in under 3 seconds, so I'd be hired. But I wouldn't want to work for a company that bases hiring on criteria like this.
The second argument "everything to the left of the division symbol is divided by everything to the right of the symbol" fails if you have more than one division symbol in the same line.
Very easy to solve but solving it in 3 seconds is absolutely ridiculous. Took me a little less than a minute. I’d be willing to bet even most mathematicians wouldn’t be able to solve this in only 3 seconds.
The correct answer is "This is written in ambiguous notation such that it will confuse a large subset of readers, leading to incorrect answers. As a member of this team I will maintain clear communication without room for speculation or interpretation so that work is completed efficiently and correctly, unlike this problem. Also it's 11."
Turn everything into multiplication and addition, do multiplication before addition....
Took me 5, but I had to squint to read it in the thumbnail.
2:34 1 month ago, you made a video about 'half of 2+2' and you said in the meaning 1/2*(2+2) it should be pronounced 'half of the sum 2+2'. So shouldn't this be 'all divided by the sum 3+3'?
I would have gotten the job. I didn’t even think twice about
It took me 3 seconds to read “only for genius” and then another 30 seconds to realize it was not talking about a person named “genius” or that there was 1 specific genius who the problem was for… then 3 seconds to do the math problem lol
It sounds like this CEO thinks quick is better than right.
While I got this, hearing "modern interpretation" got me thinking about why our order of operations is the way it is. Could be an interesting video.
It was kinda obvious?
I cannot imagine wanting the sort of job where this sort of knowledge would be remotely relevant. I have a language degree, and was a qualified lawyer and part-time judge. Arithmetic never entered into it.
' Parentez' kullanmak ne kadar önemli.❤
Parentez kullanmadan yapılan bu işlemler, hokus pokus gibi bir şey. Doğruluğu tartışılır.
Can I just point out how this question -seems to always- so often produce positive whole numbers, -no matter how badly- even when you mess it up?
That's a pretty interesting feature I think.
EDIT: updated for all my fellow disagreeable showoffs :)
3*3-3÷(3+3)=8.5 😂
@miraculix666 Guess I didn't try hard enough :P
And I think you mean...
(3 * 3) - ( 3 / (3 + 3 ) )
3 × (3 - 3) ÷ (3 + 3) = 0 is not positive.
1st second: 9-1+3
2nd Second: (8+4)-1
3rd second: 11
I blame homeschooling and modern "revolutionary" thinking for people not being able to do basic math reasoning like this.
I think Presh should do a video like this where he visualizes PEMDAS with money so people who think the answer here is 5 or 1 can understand that their incorrect methods are literally costing them.
i always knew i was a genius, bring on the nobel prize!
The answer is obviously 5.
BODMAS
3x3-3÷3+3
=9-1+3
=9-4
=5
Cause addition is done before subtraction!
Btw, this is obviously wrong, please do not make this mistake ever.
NO, add and subtract are on same level. Do both left to right. 😊
@louisepeterson6626 it's funny cause doing the whole thing entirely from left to right ignoring the order of operations also gives 5. I wonder if it's just a coincidence or there's actually a theorem out there that explains this phenomenon
@@hikari1690 It's just coincidence, there is no theorem. It is easily shown that the phenomenon that
(((n × n) - n) ÷ n) + n
gives the same result as
(n × n) - ((n ÷ n) + n)
only works for n = 3 and n = 0 .
@@yurenchu I'm almost certain it won't work when n=0. But eh, that's fair. If I've learnt anything from binge watching 3b1b, it's that patterns don't hold unless you can prove it does
@@hikari1690 LOL! You're correct! Sorry, I didn't check my answer. I merely set both expressions as equal and then solved the resulting quadratic for n . I forgot that both expressions involve division by n .
Both expressions approach -1 as their limit when n approaches 0 .
To make this even more confusing. The calculator app in windows...
when in Standard Mode, it calculates from left to right;
when in Scientific Mode, it calculates in the order of operations.
Good luch trying to explain that to someone who is not very proficient in math.
Your videos are always full of creativity and style. Thank you for your skill!🍿👾🌶
The problem is ho hum. Even in 3 seconds.
But the English?😮
It should be
“Only for a Genius”
Or
“Only for Geniuses”
😅
Come on people, we, as a society should have gotten over order of operations questions centuries ago 😑
Education these days is so broken... such that people fail at something as basic as this.
Modern maths nowadays means typewriter notation, which means you need brackets to show what you mean.
The horizontal fraction line will make it obvious when writing it down on, for example, the blackboard in yesteryear's schools.
Either a short line between the third and fourth 3 or a long line between the first three and the two last ones.
So, in "classic" maths, the answer is 1.
Thanks for a 3rd grade math question xD
This is why parentheses are used.
lexical ambiguity is such a pain in the rear