Fetishes

http://xkcd.com/468/

by andreyf • 18 years ago

19 18 18 years ago

xkcd.com

sdpurtill• 18 years ago

This isn't Digg. This has nothing to do with Hacker News either.

rms• 18 years ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_t...

technoguyrob2• 18 years ago

I dare say very few of the Digg population would understand this joke.

Personally, I haven't laughed at an XKCD this much in a while.

swombat• 18 years ago

Pretty much any xkcd cartoon has everything to do with Hacker News.

felixc• 18 years ago

I usually don't like to engage in the "this doesn't belong on HN" game, but the fact is that most of us who enjoy XKCD already read it, thanks to the magic of RSS or knowing what day of the week it is. So basically, if you like XKCD, this is old news, and if you don't, this is boring news. Summation: this doesn't belong on HN.

ars4• 18 years ago

Except that by posting it we get to discuss Godel and Russell's paradox.

sutro• 18 years ago

There is no more relevant Hacker News than material relating to sexual fetishes. PG, you might want to rename the site "Sexual Fetish News" just to make that clear.

Thanks for the karma, folks. I'm here all week. Don't forget to tip your waitresses.

neilk• 18 years ago

That's Russell's paradox, which he knew all about, since it was bloody named after him.

Godel would have said something more like this: "Sure, put me down for 'fetish for systems of fetish knowledge which cannot prove the existence of this fetish.'"

Sorry to subject you to pedantry, but someone was wrong on the internet.

smanek• 18 years ago

I was thinking the same thing.

One of my favorite set theory jokes is based on Russel's Paradox.

A mathematician starts a proof: "Consider the set of all sets that have never been considered. Oh wait ... never mind"

technoguyrob2• 18 years ago

But that's perfectly valid. We have just considered that set, so obviously it's not an element of itself. I think maybe what you meant to say is after that: "Now consider an arbitrary element in this set." That would present a problem. Of course so would showing it's non-empty, but I think there could be a way around that.

michael_dorfman• 18 years ago

Very funny, but the misspelling makes me wince.

ars4• 18 years ago

I didn't notice one, care to specify?

brent• 18 years ago

Russel

ars4• 18 years ago

He fixed it. You can un-wince.

flipbrad• 18 years ago

Read "Godel Escher Bach - an Eternal Golden Braid"? Wonderful book by a remarkably clever computer scientist attempting a (very tricky) definition of consciousness (or 'a system getting meaning when composed of meaningless parts', like your singular identity from a jumbled mass of 'selfish' neurones), with a view to explaining his thoughts on how to achieve strong AI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del,_Escher,_Bach

Fetishes

Related Stories