Talk:190: IPoD
Latest comment: 19 December 2023 by 162.158.33.148
The joke "IPoD -- IP over Demographics" is referring to the media player from Apple.--Dgbrt (talk) 18:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but I doubt it. 184.66.160.91 02:35, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
- Of course it is, but as just a secondary joke. It doesn't relate to the main point of the comic. But it should be mentioned anyway. 108.162.219.223 19:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
- I find it boggling how many people are so weak-minded as to feel certain about something based on evidence instead of proof. It is absolutely impossible to rationally state "of course it is" if you lack proof. You are going by the circumstantial evidence of the letters coinciding, and nothing more. It cannot be better than "probably is". Not only is this a logical problem a-la Karl Popper, but this failing also seems to involve a weakly developed theory of mind. The belief that one can know with certainty the thoughts of another in a case like this shows that while they may understand the basic premise of "that person can't always see what I'm seeing", they don't fully grok "I don't necessarily know his thoughts, based on my external observations and speculation". โKazvorpal (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
- Harsh, but true. Beanie talk 13:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- I find it boggling how many people are so weak-minded as to feel certain about something based on evidence instead of proof. It is absolutely impossible to rationally state "of course it is" if you lack proof. You are going by the circumstantial evidence of the letters coinciding, and nothing more. It cannot be better than "probably is". Not only is this a logical problem a-la Karl Popper, but this failing also seems to involve a weakly developed theory of mind. The belief that one can know with certainty the thoughts of another in a case like this shows that while they may understand the basic premise of "that person can't always see what I'm seeing", they don't fully grok "I don't necessarily know his thoughts, based on my external observations and speculation". โKazvorpal (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
The description describes altering the birthrate channel as 'encouraging or discouraging women from having children'. I always interpreted it as either conceiving children himself, or causing abortions or miscarriages, respectively. 172.70.90.246 18:09, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
- You're welcome. --162.158.33.148 10:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)