Re: CTS community mail
- From: Ryan Williams <ryan820509@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 16:59:39 +0200
Just finished watching John Wick. The movie is kinda mediocre but the
action scenes are top notch.
On 30 Dec 2014 13:39, "Ilitirit Sama" <ilitirit@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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:
