1.3k
u/SaladBoy97 1d ago
For anyone curious, literal translation:
"Are you an entrepreneur?"
Translator: "Where are you going, wearing fancy clothes like a hero?"
Kid: "Nowhere"
Translator: *Oh I get it. Gotta make the kid look cool* "He's looking out for..."
465
u/whyamihere999 1d ago
After Nowhere, he says, 'aisehi ghoomne nikla hoon.'
Meaning, nowhere, just roaming around...
276
u/SputnikFalls 1d ago
I too roam the lands looking for bitches.
20
25
9
68
u/Longjumping-Pop7512 1d ago
Nope, the kid replied they are going to just stroll around. For which the guy translated — well everyone knows.
Cultural reference or I should say this Gen reference; indeed when they are strolling around in good cloth, they are trying to find a maal ( bitches indeed ) 😉
15
5
3
623
u/Bullrawg 1d ago
From what I’ve heard there is a direct correlation between mo bitches and mo money
164
u/ChemistVegetable7504 1d ago
But mo money, mo problems.
92
u/nasi_lemak 1d ago
Hence mo bitches = mo problems. Math checks out
41
u/TaoTeCha 1d ago
Perfect example of correlation not equaling causation. Because Jay Z has 99 problems but a bitch ain't one
21
u/clerveu 1d ago
You can even extrapolate further from this! Jay Z's data points are hardly random.
So given all the above, with M = money, B = bitches, and P = problems...
M -> B as a direct correlation
M -> P as a direct correlation
therefore B & P are also correlated, but only derived.
In Jay Z's case, while presumably present given his M, B is NOT actually a member of his problem set at all, which is in and of itself actionable information.
The thing we need to remember is this guy's one of the wealtiest MCs in the world - M is basically maxed, which would imply, given the predicate M -> B, his B should also be maxed. So we've got a case with both M high and B high, along with an exceptionally high P (99, presumably near the ceiling genre/lifestyle wise). If B -> P held even weakly you would absolutely expect to see B show up in his problem set.
This anecdotal, n=1 experiment therefore presents statistically sufficient proof B cannot, as a matter of logical necessity, ever be a member of P.
12
5
2
15
1
1
1
3
u/MattieShoes 1d ago
There's also an inverse correlation.
Mo money, mo bitches. mo bitches, less money.
... Unless you're a pimp
1
-1
98
60
8
u/maverickoff 1d ago
I dont dress nowhere as fancy as this young gentleman but I am also looking for bitches, unfortunately bitches are nowhere to be found lol
7
2
14
5
3
2
0
0
-1
-13
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.