higher intelligence = higher ignorance?
111 karma · joined February 17, 2019
"enter your name and your favourite vegetable" is to lure bots into responding?
When "I am human", I am asked to select boats and fail because I didn't tick the images with ships.
I would not like to add a Captcha that appears to be smart Alec, has a tendency to trigger the same in the respondents or, worse, makes customers feel stupid. reCaptcha somehow seems better at avoiding this.
It's more likely that the "applied pressure" is simply negative...
> The book was credited to Clarke alone.
TIL :)
2) Even if it were, and my twenty-something assistant left my shop door open at night consistently, to me, the question of the legality of the resulting damage would be rather secondary.
TTF?
It's fantastic to what lengths some of us go for a good pun :-)
In the case at hand, correctness of the validator expression V clearly means "V determines well-formedness of any regular expressions" which is clearly not implied by "V is well-formed" (a much weaker statement because ".*" is well-formed but matches everything). Therefore, when applying V to itself, we only learn if a weak requirement for V's correctness holds.
Similar, perhaps, to validating whether a given number is a Gödel number of a well-formed logical statement rather than assessing the verity of the logical statement it encodes.
Also, I am not saying whether it is or is not possible to build such a regular expression. Rather, the question just doesn't tick the boxes of either, the Liar's Paradox, nor Gödel's Incompleteness result -- contrary to what was suggested. So you could still be right but for different reasons.