What is Digg?47 Comments
- ICSU, on 06/17/2008, -1/+10Humor literally puts me through the idiocy I see around. And it helps you score too.
- rentmitchum, on 06/17/2008, -2/+10I already knew this but then again I've read a few books on evolutionary biology and the like.
Some good reads for those interested in why we are the way we are (which is hopefully everyone, but I know this to not be true).
The Third Chimpanzee by Jared Diamond
Thumbs Toes and Tears: And Other Traits That Make Us Human by Chip Walter
How the Mind Works or The Blank Slate by Stephen Pinker (two diff books, both are great)
Those are some favorites that would keep anyone busy for at least a week or 3.
I'm reading The God Delusion right now but if anyone has any good suggestions for a good read I'm all ears.. (and an off topic, has anyone read the latest Salvatore book with Drizzt? I know it has nothing to do with this subject, I just wanted to know if it goes anywhere, the last 3 books with the Orc King were boring and went NOWHERE for 3 ***** books) - acrodev, on 06/16/2008, -3/+10I'd hate to live in a world without humor.
- humanerror, on 06/17/2008, -0/+6Imagine it... a humorless, gray world. Every day a Dane Cook act with Carlos Mencia opening.
- urbandistrict, on 06/17/2008, -1/+5Digg....helping humanity evolve.
- monoa, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3If you've not read it, A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson is wonderful. It should be required reading for everyone on the planet - followed by The God Delusion ;).
- o0joshua0o, on 06/17/2008, -0/+3You're right. Probably because the brain finds humor in grasping an unexpected pattern for itself. If someone else points it out to you, you don't get the same effect.
- hklrs, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3"Rules of grammar are what distinguish language from other forms of communication."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language
SO what other species do you know that use language? (Gods dont count) - inactive, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3So when we laugh at Darwin Award winners we are learning how to survive!
- o0joshua0o, on 06/17/2008, -0/+2Slapstick is based upon a very simple pattern. I propose that the pattern here involves subconsciously comparing the embarrassment and/or pain the other person is experiencing with the embarrassment and/or pain that you've felt at some point in your life from a similar misfortune. In other words "that was me then", contrasting with "this is me now".
To test this, you just need to find someone who's never had any kind of painful or embarrassing accident, and see if he or she thinks it's funny to watch slapstick comedy. - zimbra, on 06/17/2008, -1/+3If you have to explain something, it's not funny any more.
- nojingoist, on 06/17/2008, -1/+2Dead wrong. Do a search on language faculty. Discrete infinity. Etc. There's nothing like human language anywhere in the animal world.
- ChrisshEnzo, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1some flimsy theories. but it is interesting.
- rentmitchum, on 06/18/2008, -0/+1Haha wow, aren't you hostile. I've read books before that have theorized that laughter is a response to things that startle or surprise us. I don't remember specifically which ones, but I know I've heard that before. It's not a novel idea to me is what I was trying to get across.
Why is it every time you try to discuss books, no matter how polite you are, some jerkoff always has a problem with you (I theorize, and wait for some scientist to publish it, that it's because people who don't read books somehow feel insecure or threatened).
So I apologize that you get all your information from digg. Some others do not, and when they want to talk about it you don't gotta jump on them. - hklrs, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1http://www.pyrrhichouse.co.uk/current-publications ...
- DestroyFascism, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1Don't die laughing....
- seraph582, on 06/17/2008, -1/+2well if this is true, Islam is ******!*
- VitriolAndAngst, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1"The boy threw spot the ball. Ball threw spot to the boy."
>>THAT would be funny to a pattern recognition algorithm. It isn't funny to a human being. If spot bit the boy in the Balls -- could be funny. If the boy threw the dog at the ball, meh.
The twist needs to be both unexpected and true in a way to actually be humorous -- so I want credit for the REAL comedy algorithm;
"The boy threw spot the ball. Spot already had two of his own to play with, so he was otherwise occupied."
>> See what I mean? And it is a naughty joke -- that helps when all else fails. Dogs are able to be distracted during a good "cleansing" -- so it is a true statement.
"How do you get a dog to stop licking his balls?"
"You do it. He won't mind."
>> This is also a true and unexpected statement. One might believe a dog would enjoy this, whether or not they actually have first-hand knowledge. Or, they've spilled bacon on their pants, and just let nature take its course. - nojingoist, on 06/17/2008, -1/+2Anyone who so openly claims that he's reversing "thousands of years" of work with his brand new theory, that you can read about in his brand new book, sounds like a megalomaniac. Or just an opportunistic liar.
- lindsayl284, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1The Red Queen by Matt Ridley is a good one.
Also anything by Richard Dawkins, Carl Sagan, Stephen Jay Gould, the list goes on. - floejoe, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1Do any of these books you read discuss false attribution error and unfounded assumptions?
- dilbert, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1It's not funny: when God created the platypus he smoked marijuana.
- dsmx, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1Can you imagine a world without lawyers....
- zimbra, on 06/17/2008, -0/+1Didn't need humour to be explained to me.
- TheGuruStud, on 06/17/2008, -3/+3Squirrels have lots of humor, as well. They always think they're funny. They kept teasing one of our dogs by biting her when she was sleeping and then running through the fence and then just standing on the other side (presumably laughing) b/c she couldn't get through.
We put up a new fence and the fat ass squirrels couldn't get through. She tore them to pieces haha. You've also got to know our dog, she doesn't take ***** from anyone, it makes it even funnier. - smek2, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1Ha ha
- bizarrojack, on 06/17/2008, -2/+2So what do loud farts and people getting kicked in the balls have to do with pattern recognition?
- VitriolAndAngst, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1Yeah, and I notice how being polite wiped out an entire population.
- LLLSecretChimp, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1Maybe it was a joke.
- hklrs, on 06/17/2008, -2/+2Didn´t read the article or didnt understand it?
- inactive, on 06/17/2008, -2/+2But nitpicking and criticizing is necessary to be a digger. Admit it to yourself.
- paralock, on 06/17/2008, -5/+5"language, which is unique to humans,"
Incorrect, language is not unique to humans.
But, beyond that, it is a pretty good article and makes sense. It would be neat to have AI with humor, lol. Although I am not sure how well that would work out with their theory. We toss in a pattern that the AI does not recognize in something and it finds it funny. A lot of things could be funny to the machine... - Gareth2, on 06/18/2008, -0/+0Clarke said: "For some time now it's been assumed that a global theory of humour is impossible. This theory changes thousands of years of incorrect analyses and mini-theories that have applied to only a small proportion of instances of humour. It offers a vital answer as to why humour exists in every human society"
A global theory is impossible, and remains impossible, because a scientifically acceptable definition of the word "humour" is impossible: as is a scientifically acceptable definition of the word "funny". Humour is a mental construct and does not belong in the realms of laughter and the neurological systems that processes the situations we have labelled "funny". The word "funny" is in essence meaningless (again belonging to the cultural milieu along with "humour") as it translates into circular statements: We laugh because something is funny and something is funny because we laugh at it. Not all "humorous" events evoke laughter, but if we bar laughter from the consideration of some "humorous" events then the statement that the event was "funny" remains meaningless. "Funniness" is not an attribute of the event; the only attachment for the word are the feelings the event elicits, and as feelings are not verbally communicable we cannot define the word "funny" as something scientifically meaningful.
There is a lack of logic in Clarke's statement that humour is fundamental to our success as a species:
a) Pattern reconition is vital to our survival [It is, in fact, vital and present in virtually all animals]
b) Humour can be viewed as a process utilising pattern recognition.
c) Therefore humour is fundamental to our success as a species.
I cannot see the book as anything other than a description of a universal phenomenon (pattern recognition) linked to the idea that humour depends on pattern recognition.
If you would like to read a full critique of theories of the kind above please go to my annotated essay:Laughing and crying as displacement activities: the implications for humor theory. at:
http://basilhughhall.googlepages.com/humorandlaugh ... - PabloIV, on 06/17/2008, -2/+2So this is th first step to a grand comedic theory...
Next up THE GREATEST JOKE EVER!!!! - floejoe, on 06/17/2008, -1/+1Man you must be a real enlightened fellow to claim to "know" something that has not been published in a journal until 5 days ago.
Maybe you can enlighten us on what the grand unifying theory of the universe is too before some "scientist" decides to take credit for it. - deathsythe, on 06/17/2008, -2/+1Political correctness will be the death of humor.
And in turn, eventually the deal of our species. - humanerror, on 06/17/2008, -2/+1I can't remember who it was, but there was some ancient religious thinker who claimed that God gave man free will by telling him a joke, thereby separating him from the animals.
- CliffsNotes, on 06/17/2008, -1/+0SUMMARY:
A "Pattern Recognition Theory" is the only explanation of what humor is in this article.
It explains that humor occurs when the brain recognizes a pattern that surprises it.
Recognizing patterns is an important part of development and survival.
You may have noticed what makes babies laugh is often repetition of something. - b8man99, on 06/17/2008, -3/+1So that whole George W Bush thing was just demonstrating what a great sense of humour the Americans have, right? And does war count as extreme slapstick? Damn, I just want to know when i'm meant to laugh!
- seedplanter, on 06/17/2008, -2/+0I have noticed that humor is a key factor in good health.
- clankster, on 06/17/2008, -2/+0Anyone know where the actual article, and not the synopsis, can be found? I can't find any reference to it on nowgen's site.
- Steinr, on 06/17/2008, -3/+1No kidding...
- Haoie, on 06/17/2008, -4/+1If humour equates to success, I'll just add that Digg is very, very unsuccessful.
Or was I being funny? - cledford, on 06/17/2008, -8/+3http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is