I've seen some combinatorial underestimates on packaging before, but this one looks particularly low.

@christianp If we assume that the clothes are partitioned into different types of garment and that an outfit must have one of each, it raises the question of which partition of 49 has the smallest product that is greater than 200. 29+7+a bunch of ones, I guess, but that seems like cheating. So maybe the answer is 44+5, for 220 outfits.

@11011110 @christianp Maybe they factored in that not every combination makes sartorial sense.

Well, they're not wrong, are they? The lower bound is probably correct. #charitableInterpretation

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!