AlephNeil, I was taking Scott Adams' assertion that the button produces "happiness" at face value. I was being rather literal, I'm afraid. I think you're right to worry that no actual mechanism we can imagine in the near future would act like Scott's button.

I stand by my point, though, that if we really did have a literal happiness button, it would probably be a good thing.

As perhaps a somewhat more neutral example, I like to splash around in a swimming pool. It's fun. I hope to do that a lot over the next year or so. If I successfully play in the pool a lot during time that otherwise might have been spent reading marginally interesting articles, staring into space, harassing roommates, or working overtime on projects I don't care about, I will consider it a minor accomplishment.

More to the point, if regular bouts of aquatic playtime keep me well-adjusted and accurately tuned-in to what it means to be happy, then I will rationally expect to accomplish all kinds of other things that make me and others happy. I will consider this to be a moderate accomplishment.

There is a difference between pleasure and utility, but I don't think it's ridiculous at all to have a pleasure term in one's utility function. A more pleasant life, all else being equal, is a better one. There may be diminishing returns involved, but, well, that's why we shouldn't literally spend all day pressing the button.