| PlagueOfLocust said: @sqrl - Answer: The part that expects a rational person to have rational opinions. If you were only interested in being a wise guy, then you should have said so when I responded. I think you're confusing not having proof with having baseless opinions. You could be right that it was unintentional; if you read my posts in this thread, I've said several times that it might be unintentional. But the odds are against it; that's the math, and math trumps your assumptions. |
A sarcastic remark meant to highlight the absurdity of an idea with more absurdity does not require rationale by rational thinking. There in lies the rational thinking for a rational person with rational opinions.
Now for a topic with less usage of the word "rational"....
This idea that some artist at Nintendo is trying to play this joke on people is not rational and is not supported by any math. But since you have made the claim now please feel free to elaborate. If my memory serves me correctly there should be 2^16=65,536 different ways (including the null set) to highlight different letters combinations in the title without changing their order. And if you show me one combination with a given rarity of occurence I will show you 65,535 others with the same rarity of occuring.
To think that because this configuration is improbable proves that it was intentional would be the same as assuming that since someone wins the lottery it was rigged. Someone has to win.
In responce to your last blurb: I have read your posts, but that doesn't change the fact that I have seen zero evidence for this being intentional and as such I am going for the far more likely (and rational!) scenario of unintentional coincidense.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
