Computing Stub‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

Im confused. I expected it would take 10-15 minutes for me to write something about this seemingly erratic "law" but I'm done now. 2 minutes. So.... uhm?

Just because you have a fucked up last name that sounds german/professorish maybe you shouldnt make up stupid laws that dont make sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 20:20, 24 April 2007‎ (talk) 213.141.89.53

Oh and substantional isnt in the actual law. It just says "it". Mmm? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 20:22, 24 April 2007‎ (talk) 213.141.89.53

this guy is well known and for real, and a lot of people really really like GEB his famous book. however, the article is pompous and so poorly written that it comes off as total crap. this needs to be completely rewritten 131.247.152.4 20:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FaCade (Fuh-SAWED) spelled the French way with the cedille? Maybe in French, but in English we don't have that letter. Facade as it appears in English should always be spelled "Facade".

I added Brooks' law to the related list. I wouldn't want this appendix to become a long list of xxxx's law, but Brooks' law directly deals with late projects becoming later, which is a related theme to Hofstadter's law. KWD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwdavids (talk • contribs) 13:55, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Amounted" is the past tense of a verb. "Amount" is a noun. Can someone who knows what the author is trying to say express it in proper English, please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.184.75.225 (talk) 13:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. (sorry about the double edit, I forgot to type in the reason the first time)

Amounted is a strange piece of English. It actually has a role as an intransitive verb (such as "all his efforts amounted to nought"), but its use in the sentence we're talking about was cryptic at best.

This article is, with the exception of the quoted line, word-for-word identical to Dictionary.com's entry for Hofstadter's law. It needs to be rewritten.--An Enormous Laser Beam (talk) 18:34, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, dictionary.com is just quoting Wikipedia (this is what you mean, right?) Shreevatsa (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly Hofstadter's law states is not in the article. I came to wikipedia trying to find out what it is, and I'm still just as confused. Someone who knows what Hofstadter's law is needs to add that in.--An Enormous Laser Beam (talk) 18:34, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? It's exactly what it says in the article. Hofstadter's law is: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law". See also Parkinson's Law etc. Shreevatsa (talk) 19:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strictly speaking the adage hofsatdter created and self-referred to as his law, is not a law. a law governs the behavior of a group or system, and/or all the components of the group or system. The only thing hofstadter's law appears to be governing is itself, and by reasonable uses of the words law and behavior, laws can not be said to exhibit behaviors.

If Hofstadter's law is not a paradox then it can be best described as tautology.

Some origin and context should be provided in the article. which chapter of egb was it stated in? actually, on second thought could this article please just get merged with an article on egb?208.125.126.250 (talk) 19:16, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The page number is provided in the footnote. What else do you need? Yworo (talk) 20:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not question Hofstadter nor GEB (which I haven't finished yet, but so far it is brilliant), but I wonder of the importance of the law. The only reference is the book itself, and for it to have its own article I feel that it should be mentioned someplace else. Anyone who is more into it, please try to add some additional sources / references. Quispiam (talk) 22:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]