My Computer Achieved Consciousness Today

Just for 10 minutes though. I was not expecting this, not today.

What did he say? He said we're on the right track. I had a feeling we were.

Look What I've Done

I think I've just wrecked math... again. I know a few people who are going to be upset!

Here's how: I've discovered three numbers that do not satisfy the "Pythagorean Theorem", namely 20, 10, and 25. Go ahead, try to do it. It just won't work. 20² + 10² = 500 and 25² = 625.

You may argue that the numbers are only supposed to work for the sides of a right triangle. I'm not an idiot, I know that people claim this. Let's pretend that I grant you this, are you trying to tell me that I can't construct a right triangle with sides of length 10 cm, 20 cm, and 25 cm? I don't believe you. The burden of proof, I do believe, is on you.

Cliché Analysis Blog: "Calling a Spade a Spade"; or Horticulture Blog #2

Although it is mildly impressive when someone is able to successfully identify a spade as being a spade, it is much more remarkable when someone correctly determines when a spade is in fact, something else. Like a shovel. What follows in an illustration, done via writing, possibly to be made into a short film at some point, but for now will remain as simply a way of establishing my point.

Gardener 1: I see a spade. It is a spade. I'm calling a spade a spade.


Gardener 2: I challenge you on that point. I say the spade is shovel.


Gardener 1: That is ridiculous. Wouldn't you have to say "That shovel is a shovel", if in fact the object we are both describing is a shovel? Besides, it is a spade.


Gardener 2: I believe in a roundabout way, you are begging the question.

Gardener 1: That statement is misguided!

Gardener 2:Either way, let's not get bogged down in semantics. That spade is a shovel, and I can prove it, but first we'll have to agree on a definition of "shovel".


Gardener 1: Well, a shovel digs, but it can also kill kittens. Which definition is more appropriate?


Gardener 2: I suggest we go with the first. A shovel digs. We will both start digging, you with a shovel, and me with this object, the object you refer to as "spade".


Gardener 1: Ok.

They dig, and it turns out Gardener 2 digs an impressive hole with the spade, thereby rendering it a shovel.


Gardener 1: I guess that spade is a shovel. You have proven me wrong once again!

Implying that the past has seen much of the same, ie. Gardener 2 has constantly proven Gardener 1 wrong in some fascinating way!


Gardener 2: So I have. Let's not dwell on it though. We have more gardening to do, as we are both gardeners.

The End.

Increasing The Number of Interesting Situations You Face: A Guide

If your life is something like mine, you tend to get bored by the day-to-day routine of it all. You get along with your friends, neighbors, workmates, law-enforcement officers, and so on. I've been thinking about this for a few hours today, and I've decided to once again offer advice to my vast readership. The key, I think, is to increase the number of interesting situations you face, and I've compiled a three step guide to make this number skyrocket. Here we go.

Step 1: Insult people you are close to a little bit more often. However, be sure that your insult can be interpreted in a less insulting way, as this will provide you with an out should you want to use it. For example, you could say to your boss "You smell like burnt tires." Do not say "You smell like burnt tires, which I, like the vast majority of the population, find offensive." The first statement provides a way out. If he threatens to fire you, you simply say (with a sly grin) "But I enjoy the smell of burnt tires!" Situation diffused.

Step 2: Lie about trivial things. Like the time, or the weather. Or whether or not the elevator is working today. People will have no idea what's motivating you to do such things, so this will more than likely make for interesting confrontations. Remember the sly grin.

Step 3: Make liberal use of the following phrases:

• "Although I don't agree with his views, the methods Ted Kaczynski used were certainly admirable."
  
• "I find it hard to believe that metaphysical naturalism can completely account for consciousness."
• "Yes, as a matter of fact I am carrying a bomb. It's in my backpack."

Warning: This guide remains untested, I just thought this stuff up this morning. Please let me know how it works out for you.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Update: I've added a Step 4: Start diagnosing people with fatal conditions. They don't actually need to have the fatal condition though, that's what makes it so interesting!

I'm Not Narcissistic Enough

No, I'm just joking. Well not really. I honestly do sometimes wonder if I am narcissistic enough, though I've come to no definite conclusion. That's not the point of this blog though. The truth is I wrote this blog title in an attempt to be completely original, as I thought nobody would have ever written that phrase before. Apparently though, a surprisingly high number of people in the blogosphere have written it, I just googled it.

Conclusion: It is becoming increasingly more difficult to write down an original phrase, let alone an original idea. This spells trouble for this blog. I guess if I am to remain "cutting edge", I am going to have to pretty much become a horticulture blog. Nothing but horticulture. All the time. The previous entry was a sneak preview into what you can expect from this blog in the future. I know it was good, I just don't know if I can keep it up.


-----------------------------------------------------------------

Upon further research, it has come to my attention that there are already a number of horticulture blogs. That's surprising.

Horticulture Blog

Instructions:

1. Plant Tree
2. Water Tree
3. Watch Tree Grow!

Zoology

This is one of the few words in the English language with no exact opposite. I don't know whether this should make me feel happy or sad. I guess I have some serious thinking to do.








It can be argued that twelve has two exact opposites. I suggest you don't.

Opinion: Axioms From Euclidean Geometry That Really Need To Go - Part 1

Welcome to the first article in a five part series.

The axiom that I hate the most is:

Axiom 3: Given any straight line segment, a circle can be drawn having the segment as radius and one endpoint as center.

I don't really understand this one at all. I think it's kind of dumb. This axiom has got to go!