Boiling Down the Meaning of Life 218
Shipud writes "A recent article in Journal of Biomolecular structure and Dynamics proposes to define life by semantic voting [Note: open-access article]: 'The definitions of life are more than often in conflict with one another. Undeniably, however, most of them do have a point, one or another or several, and common sense suggests that, probably, one could arrive to a consensus, if only the authors, some two centuries apart from one another, could be brought together. One thing, however, can be done – short of voting in absentia – asking which terms in the definitions are the most frequent and, thus, perhaps, reflecting the most important points shared by many.' The author arrives at a six-word definition, as explained here."
Ok ok...I'll tell you! (Score:5, Funny)
"Undeniably, however, most of them do have a point, one or another or several, and common sense suggests that, probably, one could arrive to a consensus, if only the authors, some two centuries apart from one another, could be brought together."
Forget water boarding: just use that sentence.
(and) six-word definition, as explained here: (Score:5, Funny)
"Service Temporarily Unavailable"... nah, its just three words based on my definition of counting :)
But if we look deep into the message and add "try again later", i think author is spot on.
Re:Ok ok...I'll tell you! (Score:5, Funny)
Here's mine (Score:5, Funny)
"it's like a box of chocolates"
Re:Why do we need consensus? (Score:4, Funny)
It would cost Apple more to patent them all.