russell's antimony, was RE: bashrc
> From: Justin Megawarne [mailto:solitude@kholmes.dhis.net]
>
> On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 11:29:58AM +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > > > -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
> > > > Their is five errers in this sentance.
> > >
> > > Took me a while to find the fifth, then my brain briefly rebelled.
> > >
> > the error could be, that there are only four (orthographical)
> > errors. but as it says, that there are five errors, which
> is correct, we
> > have only four errors. so we again have five ...
> *completely perplex*
> >
> > i have the impression, that this has something to do with a
> thing, which
> > my math teacher called "russels antinomy".
> >
> > or did i miss the point? could someone enlighten me?
> >
> > --
> > Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
> > --
> > If Windows is the answer, I want the problems back!
>
> As far as I can see, that appears to be the fifth error ...
> the fact that
> there is only four errors =)
>
> Bit of a bitch ... how did that come into the thread anyway? =P
> --
yeah, but:
if the fifth error is that there are only four errors,
then there aren't only four errors, there are five.
so the fifth error isn't an error, because there are five errors.
and if the fifth error isn't an error, then there are only four errors.
but if the fifth error is that there are only four errors,
then there aren't only four errors, there are five.
so the fifth error isn't an error, because there are five errors.
and if the fifth error isn't an error, then there are only four errors.
but if the fifth error is that there are only four errors,
then there aren't only four errors, there are five.
so the fifth error isn't an error, because there are five errors.
and if the fifth error isn't an error, then there are only four errors.
etc etc etc etc etc
Dominic Blythe
----------------------------------------------
I used to be an advocate of
Anything But Microsoft
until I discovered
Debian GNU/Linux.
Reply to: