To understand terminal capitalism, first you must understand recursion.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 15 points 9 months ago (5 children)

Funny but I have an itch to note that this is a simple infinite loop, not a recursion.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 9 months ago (4 children)

    What is capitalism if not recursion? Spending more and more resources on falling into a bottomless pit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Not to be pedantic, and I do appreciate the humor, but that's not recursion either :3 Recursion doesn't need to be endless. Recursive functions can absolutely have logical termination.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

    What does capitalism do but logically terminate resources?

    But note taken. I just think the comparison is inspiring.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    Logically terminating resources does not imply a terminating logic loop. Clever wordplay, though.

    Recursion has a specific definition. It means solving a problem by breaking a process down into smaller and smaller self-similar pieces until reaching the "base case". In programming, it (almost) always means a function that calls itself as part of its internal logic. Depending on what the function does and the conditions for returning a value from the function, it may do that one time, many times, or not at all. A classic example is the Boggle solver.

    I did say I was being pedantic :P

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago

    Oh, I meant the ping pong loop of the GitHub bot and it was pure technical nitpicking. But since you're asking, the definition of recursion is a function calling itself. I find it difficult thinking about capitalism as a single function. For me it looks more like running an infinite loop on finite resources. But applying a technical term as a metaphor leaves a lot of room for interpretation, so there is no right or wrong

  • source
  • parent