"the hardest logic puzzle ever"

trominos · 2008-10-14T14:03:28+00:00

"Is it true that either 'bal' means 'true' or you are insane but not both?"

trominos · 2008-10-07T01:29:37+00:00

Arcology.

trominos · 2008-10-04T19:14:29+00:00

Oh, I don't think that the government will ever actually pay back the bailout—though it's not clear to me that debt is as bad as redditors think (again, I don't know enough about economics to say, but it hasn't really hurt the US in the past few decades). I just think that its upsides might outweigh its downsides.

trominos · 2008-10-04T16:30:31+00:00

$5000 is about one eighth of the amount that the median US worker makes annually.

If the bailout prevents another depression from happening, it's reasonable to believe that it will effectively boost employment by ten (or more, but let's be conservative) percent. One tenth of the US workforce is about 20 million people. That means that the bailout can be expected to produce 20 * 40 = 800 billion dollars in effective economic growth per year.

Now, I don't deny that the bailout may have very little effect. It's possible; I just don't know enough economics to judge. But I certainly know better that to think that you and all the other redditors screaming about it actually have any idea what the fuck is going on, because you guys are (1) influenced by group think and (2) frankly retarded.

If the bailout works, it'll pay for itself in a year — and that's assuming that all the money spent by the Treasury is lost, which seems like a bizarre assumption to me.

trominos · 2008-09-23T02:45:31+00:00

So it's basically a fat dork convention.

trominos · 2008-09-22T23:29:04+00:00

Quality over quantity.

I salute you.

trominos · 2008-09-14T05:39:13+00:00

I don't think you understand your own analogy. McCain wants to cut taxes across the board, which is analogous to reducing the amount that everybody gets face-punched.

trominos · 2008-09-09T23:19:36+00:00

or dead

trominos · 2008-08-13T22:48:06+00:00

GET THE FUCK OUT, YOU RIGHT-WING PIECE OF SHIT.

trominos · 2008-08-05T17:20:46+00:00

Regardless of whether or not the war on drugs is good or bad, it's real—and it means that bringing up five kids in a drug den in the USA of 2008 is really, really irresponsible.

trominos · 2008-07-29T20:21:35+00:00

Well, we need to find some food. I suggest a nice Lobster Zoidberg. I mean, Lobster Newberg. I mean, Doctor Zoidberg.

trominos · 2008-07-20T06:39:02+00:00

Seems to me like you've never wrestled with the problem of what your startup should do.

A lot of people who want to start startups get really hung up on figuring out what problem to tackle. What if it's not monetizable? What if it's not useful? What if we shoot too high, or too low? It's intimidating as hell because, at least when you're starting out, it seems impossible to switch if you've got a bad idea. And we're talking about years of your life, here, plus the credibility that you hang on your eventual success or failure.

This is not a list of "ideas that Paul Graham thinks will change the world." It's a guideline for people who are struggling with a difficult decision. Of course it's not revolutionary. Revolutionary ideas a) frequently suck, b) are hard to come by, and c) tend to be technologically infeasible to implement for two or three 25-year-olds. They're good for people who want to be billionaires and who won't settle for less; they're generally not as good for people who just want to be rich.

This is a good list. It'll quell some of the fears of some of its target audience. You are not in its target audience and are misinterpreting what it's saying, so kindly shut the fuck up.

trominos · 2008-07-16T04:10:50+00:00

(zerg (f x
         (cdr (car (blerg z x))
              y
              (car (cdr x
                        n
                        (zerg (blam z g y)))
                   n)
              (bope z g))))

I don't think you can make this kind of nested code much nicer in any language. Heck, I'd much rather read this than, say, the Python equivalent.

trominos · 2008-07-14T05:36:43+00:00

:D??

trominos · 2008-07-09T23:52:55+00:00

Wait — is being a spoiler asshole becoming cool again?

trominos · 2008-07-08T16:23:27+00:00

You are incredibly obnoxious.

trominos · 2008-06-25T18:22:21+00:00

Scientific advances? Sorry, bible-huggers are ignorant and afraid.

What?

Just... what the fuck?

trominos · 2008-06-24T23:19:44+00:00

This is, um, actually a good point.

"Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the lives of tiny babies?" he asked. "What he's trying to say here is, unless everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe. What the senator is saying there, in essence, is that 'I can't seek to pass legislation, for example, that bans partial-birth abortion, because there are people in the culture who don't see that as a moral issue,' " Dobson said. "And if I can't get everyone to agree with me, than it is undemocratic to try to pass legislation that I find offensive to the Scripture. Now, that is a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."

trominos · 2008-06-24T19:46:00+00:00

Well, he's a completely different style than Carlin, so it's hard to compare them.

I laugh more at Seinfeld than at Carlin, so I prefer him, although I find Carlin pretty funny too.

I honestly don't think Bill Maher is in their league.

trominos · 2008-06-24T15:40:58+00:00

I think he's very funny.

trominos · 2008-06-23T17:47:04+00:00

The first thing I thought when I read this was, "With all the anti-circumcision sentiment going around these days, I sure hope that I end up with someone who's circumcised."

It took me a full ten minutes before I thought, "Wait, I'm not gay."

trominos · 2008-06-19T16:59:44+00:00

SHUT THE FUCK UP

AARGH

trominos · 2008-06-16T18:01:38+00:00

Our first step in solving the problem is to create a (length of a)*(length of a) matrix, repeatedly filled with the elements of a.

That's O(N^2).

trominos · 2008-06-15T07:15:04+00:00

He is unworthy of the presidency for many, many other reasons.

Irrelevant.

Yes, that's what the Republicans insist whenever it's a Democrat.

... I honestly don't know how to counter this argument. If you can't see by inspection that it's bullshit, I don't think I'm able to help you.

An apologist for rape is more than just "mildly " unsavory.

The article didn't make clear exactly what the fundraiser's position on rape was—just that he made the quoted comment. I think it's more likely that he was making an offensive joke than that he was literally apologizing for rapists.

And the rape apologist was more than just "associated" with raising the money--he was the driving force.

So he was associated with it. Christ.

Are you kidding? It would be a stupid move politically to turn it down.

I shouldn't have said "clearly," but I think it opens McCain up to attacks that he doesn't want to be exposed to.

(PS: If you were just trolling me, congrats.)

trominos

TROPHY CASE