You win half an internet. The good half, I think.
But he still doesn't do Fourier jokes with enough frequency. (the other half of said internet for whoever knows where I stole it)
Not really interested in the *bad* half of an internet, but I have a thought.
If 90% of everything is crud, we'd think that the "good" half of an internet would be the half with the good 10%, generally speaking.
But 90% of that half has to be crud too, since it is of course a thing in and of itself. So there's like 5% (or, if we apply the same reasoning to the supposedly good 10%, we're even worse off... only 1% claimed as non-crud).
Ultimately, even if the crud/non-crud distinction is valid, as out intuition certainly leads us to believe, we're left with no way to appraise the crud level, let us call it the "cruditude," of a given medium. One possibility would of course be to relativize the definition of crud ("one man's crud is another man's non-crud") but I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that... it feels like we'd be losing sight of the apparant fact that some things are just cruddy.
So perhaps we can say, as a second approximation, "About 50% of everything is irredeemable crud, and most of the other half avoids being crud mainly by special interest, although a tiny but conceivably non-zero fraction of everything is definitely NOT crud."
This comic still amuses me, though.
"... for a man to understand what he himself says is one thing, and to understand himself in what is said is something else." -Soren K.
An ironic motto of sorts:
The ability to quote is a serviceable substitute for wit. -W. Somerset Maugham.