🚀 go-pugleaf

brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>Dan politely observes that *constructive* criticism would take the
>form of an alternate definition of ``has'' that everyone could agree
>to. Benjamin apparently isn't intelligent enough to be constructive
>and formulate a useful definition of ``has.'' Dan rudely observes that
>Benjamin is merely being insulting for the pleasure it brings to
>Benjamin's hypothalmus.

Ah, but what happened is that we redefined "constructive" and didn't
tell you.  By inciting you into repeated and lengthy net diatribes, we
take up more and more of your time, which (judging from what you put
on the net) is probably constructive in that it diverts you from other
activities in the real world.  There are AI projects underway to see
if we can automate this process.  Similarly, we redefined "pleasure";
everyone but you is involved in a contest to see just how long and
vituperatively you will respond to each new jab.  Sort of like betting
on dog races.

David Chase
Sun Microsystems