People think Rumsfeld's particular phrasing is funny,
So what would be the non-funny way to say? IMHO, Rumsfeld's phrasing is what you get if you just say it the most direct way possible.
This is what always bothers me: people who say, "hey, what you said was valid and all, but the way you said it was strange/stupid". Er, so what would be the non-strange/stupid way to say it? "Uh, implementation issue."
Rumsfeld used it as the basis of a non-answer to a question...
In the exchange, it looks like the reporter's followup question is nonsense. It only makes sense to ask if it's a known unknown, since you, er, never know the unknown unknowns. (Hee hee! I said something that sounds funny! Now you can mock me while also promoting what I said as insightful!)
See also the edit to my original comment.
I'm not sure I'm capable of a good answer for the edited version of the question. I would guess (even more so than I'm guessing in my grandparent comment!) that once someone's 'ha ha' reaction kicks in (whether it's a 'ha ha his syntax is funny,' 'ha ha how ironic those words are in that context,' or a 'ha ha look at him scramble to avoid that question' kind of 'ha ha'), it obscures the perfectly rational denotation of what Rumsfeld said.
...So what would be the non-funny way to say? IMHO, Rumsfeld's phrasing is what you get if you just say it the most direc
This thread is for the discussion of Less Wrong topics that have not appeared in recent posts. If a discussion gets unwieldy, celebrate by turning it into a top-level post.
This thread brought to you by quantum immortality.