| ▲ | fourthark 4 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The exception that proves the rule. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Gormo 4 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The phrase "exception that proves the rule" refers to an apparent exception to the rule's outputs actually being explained by it having divergent inputs, i.e. if you claim P=>Q, then the exception that proves the rule would be an instance of ~Q=>~P. What's different about computers that makes this applicable here? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||