Talk:Quantum bogodynamics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is based in part on the Jargon File, which is in the public domain.

This article was nominated for deletion on April 29, 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep/No consensus to delete.

I have only one thing to say: What the devil is this? - Cymydog Naakka 21:30, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I believe this is a self-referential page, a bogus page. While I've previously heard of bogons, I don't think it's appropriate to redirect 'bogus' to this topic, without at the very least properly referencing the wiktionary link [1] or adding something on bogus. Bogus as a word is used once. I'd like to see something on the actual word bogus; an etymology or something, instead of a (copied) geek reference to bogons.

I agree. I'm deleting the bogus bogus redirect for now, so it will be a red link. - Omegatron 13:35, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What kind of particle is a bogon?

So, is it a gauge bogon? Segv11 ^{(talk/contribs)} 08:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if bogons transmit through e-mail. It seems like only yesterday I was telling someone about @ (probably) not being allowed to occur twice in an FTP url, and then today I got this problem with two @s occuring in my FTP urls. Would that be a problem if I had been definite and found the relevant RFC? Brewhaha@edmc.net 14:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AFD debate link

This article has been kept following this AFD debate. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit]  ???

It took until the end of the page to actually explain what a bogosity IS (even then, it's hardly helpful at all - it has no explanation for what is "bogus", or how much bogosity a bogon has), spending the first half, basically just making fun of people the author finds annoying, such as evangelists and "suits". It never even attempts to in any way quantify bogosity, or how it is measured, except to say that "one lenat is understood to be too large".

It doesn't make clear what it means by "suits" or even "bogus", so it appears to be nothing more than an in-joke - if you're not part of the hacker culture then you really have no hope of understanding the joke.

I suggest this should either be better explained, or deleted, since I Can't see how it's anything but what someone "made up in school today".KrytenKoro 21:46, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Plus, looking at Lenat's page, he could hardly be defined as a "suit", if I understand the term correctly - he knows programming, he knows what he's talking about, apparently he just has a different idea about how to attain artificial intelligence.KrytenKoro 21:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. This whole subject is and always has been nothing more than an attack on Lenat. Nobody ever uses any of the relevant terms here other than "bogus" and "bogosity". I'm tempted to redirect for BLP reasons. ←Ben^B4 21:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)