It's -10. No discussion needed

It's -10. No discussion needed.

so why'd you post faggot

the answer is cucumber.

Answer is -4 you mug

Wow Op got it right
Still a faggot though

he's a faggot. why does no one ever post "OP is a fag" anymore?
sage

answer is 2 faggot.

Haha you dumb as fuck

I study mathematics and the answer is 8, believe or not, but I'm 100% right!

Another retard

Do post your step by step proof of this answer

sage goes in all fields

Please explain how you get -4 "mug"

Its -10 you fucking mongaliods

-24
/thread

-3 * 4 is -12
(2)-12 = 2 * -12 = -24

2-3*4
-1*4
-4

Izi

...

you are the dumbest person I have ever seen on the entire internet

The answer is the amount of OP's non-faggotry

...

bro

I want you to go into the catalog, and give me one thread that wouldn't be less of a waste of my time than to do bait math equations.

spoiler alert: Sup Forums is shit

The answer is "calculator" because fuck math.

2-3*4
2-12 = -10

op is a retard its -4

Nice one faggot

Answer is -20 faggots

let us analyze the problem
we see that these are most likely numbers
and because there is a "minus" operation, we are most likely working in the integers

so let us construct the integers

first, let us look at the category of sets, with morphisms corresponding to set inclusion (aka, the grothendieck topology)

we first wish to examine the subcategory induced by the "successor functor", S
we identify the empty set with the symbol 0
and we look at the product in this category, which is analogous to addition of natural numbers
then we impose this rule on the successor functor and product

a + 0 = a
a + S(b) = S(b) + a

one can easily check that this is unique

we now wish to prove that the image of the successor functor is isomorphic to the natural numbers


cont.

>2-3*4
>-1*4
>-4
>Izi

Please excuse my dear aunt Sally. She's retarded and doesn't know any better.

this is so cancerous it gave me a real headache.

>2*4=8
>8-3=5
answer is 5 faggots