3 ms·
"You could count the number of skilled electronics engineers on US soil, and there's probably a million in Shenzhen alone." Anyone else failing to semantically
by intrasight 2y ago
"You could count the number of skilled electronics engineers on US soil, and there's probably a million in Shenzhen alone."
Anyone else failing to semantically parse that sentence?
- sndean 2y agoSame here. I was trying to insert “on one hand” or similar before the comma, but that’s too small.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 2y agoMaybe he just means they're literally countable. Like, accurate to a single digit?
- ben_w 2y agoI suspect the quotation was due to that inside their own head — that they were actually going to say "on one hand" but stopped themselves because it wasn't correct.
- Lucasoato 2y agoIt may mean that the set of the skilled electronics engineers on US soil is countable, so it is finite or there could be a one to one correspondence with the set of natural numbers.
- TheDong 2y agoMy read for that was "a human could, reasonably, count one-by-one the number of engineers if they were all arrayed in front of them", while a human can't reasonable count "one, two, three" and get to a million. I would say that a number humans can reasonably count to is about ~15,000, maybe 25k, assuming you're limited to about 15 hours of counting. Any number over about 100k is simply a number humans are incapable of counting up to from one.
- ragazzina 2y agoMaybe they forgot the word "more"? It makes sense to me: "You could count the number of skilled electronics engineers on US soil, and [whatever that number may be] there's probably a million MORE in Shenzhen alone."
- Finnucane 2y agoYeah, it's poorly worded, but this guy is clearly talking in management-speak and not normal English anyway.