Re: CTS community mail
- From: Ilitirit Sama <ilitirit@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 13:38:33 +0200
Finally made SMB my bitch. They even have this helpful message at the end
telling you "Congrats! You have finished everying in NSMB!"
On to Bayonetta 2 now. Man, what a game. I can see myself playing this
for a while.
Stupid lol of the day:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3QcfZhYBzo&feature=youtu.be
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Ryan Williams <ryan820509@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> *LOL*
>
> That Jean though...
>
> And Professor X looks (and sounds) like Dr. Evil *lol*
> On 29 Dec 2014 21:02, "lindsey kiviets" <lindseyak@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-iMVsi0IuY
>> ------------------------------
>> Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 15:59:16 +0200
>> Subject: Re: CTS community mail
>> From: ilitirit@xxxxxxxxx
>> To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> If you want to get really technical (read: anal) you can say that you'd
>> also have to prove that married and unmarried are mutually exclusive
>> states.
>>
>> Consider polygamy: You can be married to 4 women, but then you divorce
>> 1. To unmarry someone means to undo a marriage them. So technically in
>> this case you are married and unmarried.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 3:30 PM, sameegh jardine <sameegh@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> lol, hadn't considered that possibility :P
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Ilitirit Sama <ilitirit@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Correct, except if you use Constructive Logic. In that case you would be
>> required to prove that Alice, Bob and Charlie are indeed a married or
>> unmarried person, and you would not be able to use the Law of the Excluded
>> Middle or Double Negation.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitionistic_logic
>>
>> Why is this important? Because Alice, Bob and Charlie may in fact be the
>> name of animals (not people), which would either mean the answer is False
>> or undecidable.
>>
>> But we are reasonable folk after all, so we can appeal to Occam's Razor
>> to handle that.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 9:25 PM, sameegh jardine <sameegh@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, because irrespective of Alice's status the question being asked will
>> be held true for either the first or second statement.
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Ilitirit Sama <ilitirit@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> By the way, here's a riddle:
>>
>> Bob is looking at Alice. Alice is looking at Charlie. Bob is married.
>> Charlie is not.
>>
>> Is a married person looking at an unmarried person?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Other related posts:
