Cute Beats Smart?

Cute Beats Smart is an excellent curative to this horror.

This entry was posted in Etc. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Cute Beats Smart?

  1. Paul Gowder says:

    Not for those of us who are smart but not cute it doesn’t. I’d want, at least, buzzsaws and laser beams on my robot.

  2. Andrew DeWeese says:

    Oh please, professor. It’s obvious that the little, innocent-looking robot is using its cuteness to manipulate others into doing the work for it – and then, of course, it gets the credit at the end, not the 20-30 faceless people it duped into doing its navigation for it. It fooled everyone and came out on top.

    Shoot, it probably WROTE the 48 laws!

  3. LACJ says:

    Ha great comments all. I vote for at least one buzzsaw, just on principle. But buzzsaws tend to work against the cuteness factor…

  4. Patrick (G) says:

    Niccolo Machiavelli had better and more useful advice in the Prince than can be found in the 48 laws.
    I got bored reading them (and I’m an avid reader with a pretty good attention-span); it seems like a lot of mental effort to be a scheming, lying, manipulating parasite. And there’s no guarantee that other people will be as dumb as you need them to be in order for the 48 laws to work for you.

    Axelrod’s Evolution of Co-operation has a simpler strategy: Co-operate with others as your default strategy, retaliate against those who take advantage of your co-operation.

    My own (derivative) theory is that there are two primary types of interaction possible, and two derivative types: The primary two are co-operating and competing, and the derivative two are competing-under the guise of co-operating and co-operating under the guise of competing. both derivative types of interactions can also be referred to as cheating. Cheating is almost impossible to avoid when trying to satisfy the needs of multiple parties, but the best strategy for happiness is to minimize the cheating.

Comments are closed.