This article would be better without the opening two paragraphs about Godel's Theorem. They're just fluff, and much of what they say is wrong.

▲

Insanity 2 hours ago | parent [-]

When they claimed "Gödel’s findings may seem rather obvious" that kinda put me off of the article. Obvious to whom? It wasn't obvious at the time and I'm sure _most_ people haven't even heard or thought about the problem before.

▲

pdonis 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Maybe the wrong version of Godel's findings that the article states seemed obvious to the author. Lots of complex questions have simple, obvious wrong answers.

	▲	Insanity an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Lol yeah, that's fair. Either way it's hard to take an article seriously when it starts off like that.