This post comes across as a direct opposite of your usual interesting, clear and insightful entries.
Multiply by −1? While reversed stupidity may not be intelligence, the opposite (in the sense of antithetical) sure is.
Now, all that is left is to figure out how to multiply an English sentence by −1. The neutral element would be the empty string, I suppose. Or some tangentially related but really inconsequential comment, like this one. That’s nice, introducing some reflectivity.
Hmmm … maybe reverse the polarity? This is harder than I thought. If we’re defining this operation cleanly, we can always reward ourselves with a Kleene star. Seems arbitrary enough, no?
It’s just math and parsing theory jokes riffing on an intentional misinterpretation of “a direct opposite of interesting”, nothing that relates to the substance of the discussion as far as I can see.
(Well, it might be meta-level commentary on the substance. Anything might be a meta-level commentary. Constant vigilance.)
Multiply by −1? While reversed stupidity may not be intelligence, the opposite (in the sense of antithetical) sure is.
Now, all that is left is to figure out how to multiply an English sentence by −1. The neutral element would be the empty string, I suppose. Or some tangentially related but really inconsequential comment, like this one. That’s nice, introducing some reflectivity.
Hmmm … maybe reverse the polarity? This is harder than I thought. If we’re defining this operation cleanly, we can always reward ourselves with a Kleene star. Seems arbitrary enough, no?
Can you use different words to describe what you are trying to say here? I don’t understand but would like to.
It’s just math and parsing theory jokes riffing on an intentional misinterpretation of “a direct opposite of interesting”, nothing that relates to the substance of the discussion as far as I can see.
(Well, it might be meta-level commentary on the substance. Anything might be a meta-level commentary. Constant vigilance.)
Thanks.