2 ms·
At least in the past, it was in good taste to just call your observation simply a paradox, and let the public decide if it's worthy to stick author's name to it
by a-nikolaev 11y ago
At least in the past, it was in good taste to just call your observation simply a paradox, and let the public decide if it's worthy to stick author's name to it or not.
Let alone that for many people, the name "Kuhn" is primarily associated with Thomas Kuhn, rather than Bradley Kuhn- adding to the confusion.
- ianamartin 11y agoAgreed. When I first saw the title, I was wondering if I missed something from The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. And it doesn't really qualify as a paradox in my opinion. Perhaps briefly counterintuitive. But the real question of "X is free and does the 'same thing' as Y, which is not free: so why are more people using Y?" Is perfectly easy to explain via UI/UX, discoverability, ease of install/uninstall, or network effects (all my friends/coworkers use Y, so I will too). This seems like an uninteresting question named after a very interesting writer.
- logicrook 11y agoI always thought very funny to imagine, say, Turing say 'let M be a Turing machine'... but in general you quickly discover that most named mathematical principles were named afterward by respect for the author. And then you have some who reinvent calculus and name it after themselves...