
Right; so you've got Joe without money, and you programme in the inverse of that (no, really, just go with me).
He's very confident that the inverse of "Joe AND no money" is going to be "Joe AND money". But by parity of reasoning, couldn't you end up with "no Joe AND no money" or - probably more likely - "no Joe AND money"?
Of course, all this assumes that it's not utter horseshit from the start; but it seems to be ill-thought-out horseshit to boot.
( , Tue 2 Sep 2014, 13:27, Reply)