Daily Show "Loser Equation" formula: Comments

KhanFusionKhanFusion
edited March 2006 in Movies and Shows
I just saw a repeat of last night's Daily Show, in which there was one of the new "trendspotting" segments. At the end of this particular segment, the guy gave us a "Loser" equation.

Here is that particular equation:

[(Age you moved out) * (Age you lost your virginity) + sqrt(monthly income)]/(Number of cats +1)


Now, there are many things wrong here, but I want to hear some comments from you guys before I really go into it.


Hop to it, people.

And Iguana? You're proabbyl going to have more fun ripping this apart than I.

Comments

  • hlavcohlavco
    edited March 2006
    The first, second, and third variables don't yet apply to me! I do have a cat, however.
  • ApathyApathy
    edited March 2006
    Since when did the daily show partake of crappy LJ memes?
  • NukivajNukivaj
    edited March 2006
    I need to get a cat....
  • BehemothBehemoth
    edited March 2006
    Aside from the whole thing just being stupid, I wonder why income (even if it's only the square root of) would be in the numerator. Obviously a higher number means more of a loser. So, broke is good?
  • SerephelSerephel
    edited March 2006
    I'm assuming that a higher number means one is more of a loser. But like Behemoth said, it's all wrong with your income being in the numerator. According to that, since I don't work, I'm less of a loser.

    Then it's safe to assume that owning more cats makes you cooler, as more cats would bring down your loser rating. Cats are nice.

    And there should be a scale to compare it to. Otherwise, these numbers mean nothing.
  • BehemothBehemoth
    edited March 2006
    yeah, I suppose they should switch the income and the cats and that's work fine.
  • SerephelSerephel
    edited March 2006
    No! Cats are cool!
  • BehemothBehemoth
    edited March 2006
    Cats are cool, but the people who own them are losers.

    EDIT OF: I'm bored now! Let's go!
  • Professor MacJakeProfessor MacJake
    edited March 2006
    This really wasn't the Daily Show per se, it was Dimitri Martin's personal bit on the Daily Show. Much like how Lewis Black's segments are written by himself.

    I personally found it funny as a quick gag.
  • KhanFusionKhanFusion
    edited March 2006
    Quick? More like sloppy! Check over your work, dumbass!
  • Drooling IguanaDrooling Iguana
    edited March 2006
    Why would I enjoy ripping it apart? Science (and SCIENCE!) is cool, but math is simply a necessary evil that must be endured in the pursuit of science (or SCIENCE!)

    Besides, the evidence showing a direct corelation between loserness and cat ownership is insurmountable.
  • KhanFusionKhanFusion
    edited March 2006
    Wow. For the first time that I can rememebr witenessing, you have been incredibly unanalytical.

    First of all: The quotient is unclear. Is a higher score an indication of higher loserness? Or is a lower score such an indication?

    If a higher score (direct correlation?)is such an indication, then owning many cats makes you significantly less of a loser. Never fret about not leaving the house or losing your virginity, because you can simply own several hundred cats and still become the coolest guy ever.

    Of course, if a lower score(inverse correlation?) is such an indication of loserness, then it's in your best interest to lose you virginity and move out of the house right before the day you die... like, say, around age 80. That'd make you super cool.... unless you owned a million cats, but then I guess that's to be expected.

    But the real clincher! In either case, your monthly income has very little impact on your overall loserness/coolness! Seriously, a square root of you said income is going to dramatically reduce this value, and relative to the multiplication of the other numerator values, your income will be nigh meaningless!

    So therefore, we have direcly oppositional values arguing for coolness AND lameness! Either remaining in the parental home and staying a virgin for a long time is cool, or owning tons of cats is cool! But both cannot be cool! Likewise, one or the other is incredibly lame, but both are not lame!

    Head as-plode!
  • Amoeba BoyAmoeba Boy
    edited March 2006
    Well our path of action is clear. We must make our own loser equation and send it to the Daily Show in the hopes that they'll correct their mistake in a future episode.
  • leeshleesh
    edited March 2006
    considering that the punchline of that bit was "anyone who wrote down this equation and/or cared about it in any way is a loser," i find this thread incredibly entertaining.
  • mariomario
    edited March 2006
    Seriously, the amount of analysis going into what sounds like a throwaway joke is ridiculous. Equation jokes rarely make real mathematical sense.
  • Professor MacJakeProfessor MacJake
    edited March 2006
    Amen, brotha!
  • Doom ShroomDoom Shroom
    edited March 2006
    That equals truth! *Robotological evangelicalism*

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2023