> happiness
Neal Stephenson in Cryptonomicon, talks about fuck-you money. He says,

It was not a fixed constant, however, but rather a cell in a spreadsheet linked to any number of continually fluctuating economic indicators.

Nice. Now can a machine be made to calculate happiness similarly? The indicators could include -

• family variables
• friend variables
• economic variables
• health variables
• etc ( Can there be an exhaustive set of indicators, in the first place? )

But then this doesn't feel like how happiness is calculated internally. I mean, whenever I'm happy I have always been blissfully ignorant of a lot of those indicators... In fact I'm tempted to say happiness mandates such ignorance. And happiness, in turn, clouds these indicators some more. So was my assumption of happiness being a function of variables entirely wrong?

Lets consider for a moment that it is a function of a set(exhaustive or not) of variables. Nah. I know its not.

So is it not a function at all? Then why do we wake up everyday to do the things we do? Don't we all want to feel happy through them? At what point does the objective change to X and what is this X, which is >happiness?