Comments on: Philosophy Short and Tweet

By: Reber

Reber — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 21:42:53 +0000

I recognize that I’m late to the game, but:

Justified, true, and believed?
What about Barcelona?
And the rental Ford?

By: dtlocke

dtlocke — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 14:03:36 +0000

Lolz.

By: Matt Weiner

Matt Weiner — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 12:02:14 +0000

Oh, I wish I could edit that comment. It should be:

@dtlocke: 1 rules 2 droolz. If you’re so smart why ain’t ya rich?

By: Matt Weiner

Matt Weiner — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 12:01:14 +0000

@dtlocke: 1 rules 2 droolz

By: Carrie Jenkins

Carrie Jenkins — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 08:40:45 +0000

“But that isn’t how I intended it, and how could I have won the cryptic minimalism prize if it were obvious what I intended?”

Exactly.

By: dtlocke

dtlocke — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:34:39 +0000

As the author of the entry that won the cryptic minimalism prize, I should say that I was torn between putting ‘1’ and ‘2’. I put ‘1’ because typically when you see the word ‘fail’, it is describing what has just happened, or is happening (say, in a picture). Hence, ‘EDT fail’ is describing what has just happened: we asked the question ’1 or 2 boxes?’ and EDT theory responds by saying ‘1’. But the correct answer, of course, is ‘2’. Hence, EDT failed.

That said, I suspected that some would take it the other way—-i.e., as saying that ‘1’ is the correct answer to the question. But that isn’t how I intended it, and how could I have won the cryptic minimalism prize if it were obvious what I intended?

Anyway, lately I’ve been thinking that I should have used some of the 130 remaining characters to write something a bit longer:

1 or 2? 1. EDT fail. 1 or 2? 2. CDT ftw!

But I suspect that would have been a little less cryptic and yet not quite good enough to get any other prize. So I’m pretty happy with the way things turned out. Thanks, Carrie!

By: Matt Weiner

Matt Weiner — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 21:03:29 +0000

Ooh, I’m sorry I missed this. My entry would’ve been:

“Are all conversational implicatures cancelable? Yes they are, and I am the queen of Romania. I mean it.”

which is actually the beginning of a paper I’ve published.

By: Carrie Jenkins

Carrie Jenkins — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 11:30:37 +0000

I thought so too. Either that or the conclusion should be ‘CDT fail’. That might be one reason why it took me so long to figure out the subject matter!

By: Carmen de Macedo

Carmen de Macedo — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 03:12:30 +0000

The winner of the Cryptic Minimalism Prize is really nice:

1 or 2? 1. EDT fail.

But as it apparently is about Newcomb’s Problem, it seems that the answer to the question should actually be “2” (rather than “1”).

By: Carrie Jenkins

Carrie Jenkins — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 20:44:11 +0000

No, originality’s not a precondition at all! I liked your tweet for being substantive and completely clear despite being extremely concise.