4 ms·
The article now mentions this at the bottom. I think if he were intentionally trying to rip it off he wouldn't have called it "rule of three" because that makes
by brlewis 9y ago
The article now mentions this at the bottom. I think if he were intentionally trying to rip it off he wouldn't have called it "rule of three" because that makes it too obvious. I think he just forgot having seen it.
It's kind of fortunate that it worked out this way; I like seeing people comment on a well-established idea as if it's newly postulated.
- franciscop 9y agoYes, I misused rip-off and now after a quick search I found that it has a much more negative meaning than I intended.
- svat 9y agoPerhaps instead of "rip-off of" you meant "riff off of". :-)