By: posthumous
[2005-10-11]
The Moron Factor
from the Dictionary of Zirealism
moron factor, n, the
measure of an object indicating the minimum number of simultaneous
morons required to interfere with the effective utilization of that
object.
The moron factor of this definition, for example, is infinity. No
matter how many morons read this definition and don't understand it,
they will not interfere with a non-moron's comprehension. This moron
factor of infinity should be the goal of all engineers when designing
anything, though it is rarely achievable.
A few more examples should convince you of the importance of this
concept, and why it should be included in everyone's curriculum in
every institution of learning. Notice if you will, a little niche
somewhere with an ATM sign above it. The moron factor of this ATM is
exactly equal to its number of working kiosks. If, say, it is a humble
little ATM with but one kiosk, then one moron using this machine,
uselessly navigating its various functions at an extremely slow pace,
will effectively block anyone else from getting his hard-earned cash
any time soon. Therefore, we say it has a moron factor of one.
Now you are driving along a country road. Because of its winding
nature, the line in the middle is always solid double yellow. This
means that one single moron driving at half the speed limit will ensure
that you, too, are driving half the speed limit. The country road has a
moron factor of one. If you come to a straight patch of road with a
dashed line, that ups the moron factor to two. One moron ahead of you
can be easily passed. However, if there is another moron behind the
first moron who refuses to pass, then you are probably once again
stuck. You see? Two simultaneous morons are required to turn this road
into a nightmare of inefficiency and tardiness.
The moron factor can only take into account run-of-the-mill morons
(similarly, "idiotproof" software can only take into account
run-of-the-mill idiots). A single inspired moron can ruin just about
anything all by himself. And who would have claimed that the moron
factor of the World Trade Center was 10? It wasn't. Those were very
special morons. Also not included are morons with special privileges.
For example, one moron can create a trillion dollars of debt. But that
doesn't mean the U.S. economy has a moron factor of 1, it means that
the presidency has a moron factor of 1.
I look forward to the day when my terminology gains wide acceptance and
things finally start getting designed properly. The need for high moron
factors gets more desperate every day.
I had to look it up, supposedly someone with a mental capacity of 7-12 years old, which is a fair percentage of the population and numerically not a small number. I sort of don't favor turning the world into a big rubber room that is safe, but hope that Darwinism will solve the problem in the long-run. Or maybe it's an example of "intelligent design" that morons tend to self-destruct, and it's up to everyone else to stay out of the way. Look out! Here come the morons! What happens when morons become zombies? Or they interbreed? Zorons? Mombies? Morbies? Zorba the Geek? Maybe there could be something like a revolving door with mirrors on buildings that would act as a moron-filter.
Can I use this in everday conversation?
So if we take the limit of the Moron factor, M(x), as x approaches Zero from the positive side we get the theoretical "Infinite Moron". I conjecture the "Infinite Moron" is an individual so moronic direct interaction with the system being examined is not required to reduce productivity to a screeching halt.
This requires further study.
Apply to the International Moron Foundation for a research grant.
goody goody. with high moron factors then you can have more morons. we'll feed the rats to the cats and the cats to the rats and get the catskins for nothin'.
At the cat ranch, right?
Antwan brings up an excellent point. I am hoping that Moron Factor gets used, abused and misused in everyday speech, at least as much as other scientific terms like relativity and deconstruction.
I suppose if enough morons misuse the term (I assume they'll use it to mean the number of morons in any situation, excluding themselves), then it will be effectively destroyed, much like the adjective "literally" has been destroyed by morons. So I guess the moron factor of moron factor is not infinite, after all, but still rather high.
Maybe it needs to be expressed as a percentage? The Moron Rate? The mind reels....
(I would assume an Infinite Moron can destroy something just by thinking about it...)
literally is an adverb! d'oh!!
incomplete. You're assuming the person observing the moron's behavior isn't a moron himself.
That would give the ATM potentially a moron factor of two or three, or even greater, as the morons stack up, each gawking at the people ahead of them and thinking "Ye Gods, what morons".
A more accurate 'moron factor' would be how many morons it can attract / hold. An ATM would max out at maybe five, while a sport's stadium has a factor of up to 50,000 densely packed morons. (Not to mention the morons herding the other morons, ie, managment. Would they be a squared moron?)
So, then what's the Moron-Factor of you vis-a-vis a computer?
--Wondering in Washington
All the computers I use are library computers. Libraries jealously guard time on their computers, HENCE, everyone gets shuffled around to open computers, or they wait patiently for an hour, browsing the stacks or avoiding the bums sleeping in the study areas.
If anything, an individual computer would max out at two, while libraries computers taken as a whole attracts the whole stupid unwashed mass. Moron Factor unlimited, really.
(Oh, still waiting for that column!)
So, then the number of morons using those particular computers would be very high, indeed.
The moron factor of an ATM is exactly equal to the number of working kiosks. This is an axiom of the moron factor. zeP's vision of the moron factor is useless to engineers.
The moron factor of thingsihate is difficult to gauge. Assuming reasonable verbosity, I would put it at about 4.
I'm going to bring this up with a couple of my esteemed colleagues. I'm assuming that you'll give me permission to cite this article as long as I give proper credit?
As you'll see from my research of the inverse of the Moron factor, the Moron factor can also be used to measure the magnitude of special morons. If we take a system with a known moron factor such as an ATM kiosk and observe a special moron interacting with it, the individual's Moron factor is exactly the number of kiosks taken down. In cases where one moron takes down an entire system this method doesn't necessarily give us the total moron factor for the individual, but it does give us a minimum moron factor. Thus it is my conclusion the infinite moron is an individual capable of halting the productivity of all systems including a system with the much sought after infinite moron factor.
You're in a library with bums!?!? Well, it's your lucky day, that might be sort of a natural comedyland. Look on the library shelves for, "Fun with Bums." Also, enlist several bums in doing research and taking notes. Send a bum out for beer and sandwiches. Make some videos for "Bum Fights"...also, eat some library paste.
You might also want to include the Hatless Jack corollary, though I'm concerned about confusion over terminology. Perhaps an individual's Moron Factor should be called his "Moron Quotient"?
so, a moron factor of zero would be what, the bush administration? something that doesn't even need further interference in order to malfunction. yes, this quotient is indivisible, under god.
Yes, anything that's already broke has a moron factor of 0. Of course, before you can really guarantee that something has a moron factor of 0, you have to check your own moron quotient.
I enjoyed John Barth's book, The Sot-Weed Factor, I would recommend it. That book is the only place I've ever seen the word beshat!
So, it's sort of like the Eskimo idea of a three-dog night.
The Moron Factor is not to be mistaken for the moron factor, which is the number of morons you can factor out of a given situation. The moron factor implies that if two morons are screwing up a situation, you can factor one of them out: M^2 = M * M, and deal with them each individually. While theoretically possible, this turns out to be a logistic impossibility - everyone knows that morons are impossible to separate once they begin to act together, as shown in the 'country lane' example above. Rather, the author implies that the Moron Factor is the coefficient of moronic behavior - the number of morons required to prevent any function, f(x), from achieving functionality or utility. Thus: MF*f(x)=[Error]
MF=0; it's broke. Ain't nothing going to make this work, even someone who's not a moron.
MF=1; any moron can screw this up. The interesting point about the unity solution is that the equation often APPEARS to go to completion. However, since the moron may be the only one around to witness the failure, more often than not these don't get reported.
MF>1; design improving, it would take a couple of morons working together (or not working, as the case may be) to make this fail. At this point in the solution curve the increase in output due to the multiplicative effect of the coefficient makes failure more apparent.
A few additional examples of the coefficeient greater than one may be illustrative:
MF=3; ex: the number of humans needed to launch a Minuteman nuclear ballistic missle (i.e. The President and the two guys in the silo.)
MF=1003; ex: the number of senile votors in Florida who lost the election for Gore.
etc. until infinity is reached, the point at which no amount of morons could screw this up.
At least, that's how I understood the paper. If you didn't, chances are
you're a moron.
An interesting corrollary appeared to me from study of the infinite solution. As everyone knows, infinity, by definition, is a state that is unreachable in practice. Therefore, ANY situation that one might encounter in real life can be said to have a Moron Factor - some amount of morons can wreck even a well designed good thing. It will be interesting to examine the experimental evidence in this light.
Is there a threshold value or an asymtote to the Moron Factor solution curve? Is there some point at which you have so many morons that it dosen't matter if you add any more? Have we reached that point in the United States as of this writing?
Are there any examples of solutions which approach the infinite? Is there any way, in principle, to do something that even a whole country full of howling morons couldn't screw up? The applications for such a principal solution would be endless.
This field appears to have a healthy future of study ahead. May every proposal find funding!
Question: If morons can synergize - that is, when 2 or more get together - the effect they have is greater than additive - can we really still call them morons? Aren't they then displaying a particular talent, an efficiency, a power...? Is this not the antithesis of 'feeble'? I think I speak for morons everywhere when I say, there is really no such thing as morons.
Thank you, thank you, thank God for you,
the wind beneath my morons
I recently read a study that put forth the postulate that corporate America's current culture produces a nearly ideal environment for the non-violent psychopath who carries no regard for his fellow worker. This type of person is very good at manipulating situations to create chaos and improve their personal situations with solutions to the chaos they have willing created.
My question is this: Can there be a psycho-moron? It would seem, in my experience, that this is indeed the case. I have certainly spent many insane working hours countering what can only be described as moronic psychosis in my workplace. Another question, this time from my optimistic side: Can non-moronic workplace psychotics be defeated by true morons?
