I think it's fairly clear that nadam means 1/2, not 2.
it is now he's edited it. Wasn't clear before, to me at least. But then I "don't get it" so what do I know ;)
edit: can't reply to you as HN isn't giving me the option. But: No worries, I didn't take it personally, just a little dig :)
Personally, I find Tanya Khovanova's explanations (also linked to by the article) much easier to read: she's discussed this and related problems quite a few times.
I did not mean 'not getting it' in a negative way. (English is not my mother language.) Getting a paradox or not is a state. First I did not get it also. And I only wrote my comment, because at the time it was almost a consensus in this thread that the paradox is an uninteresting language ambiguity. I wanted to say that it is more interesting than that.