 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 21:02:19 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom>
wrote:
>Warp wrote:
>> (And, of course, the first law of the internet: Everything must be
>> interpreted in the wost possible way. Always.)
>
>Apparently not just the internet.
>
I think that behaviour is probably more prevalent on the internet
because people hide behind the anonymity of their handles (is that
term still used?) and don't feel threatened by RL peer pressure.
>"""
>A wide body of psychological research shows that
I think modern life is making this a bit worse :(
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
>
> I think modern life is making this a bit worse :(
Spoken like a true oldie!
John (a callow youth)
--
I will be brief but not nearly so brief as Salvador Dali, who gave the
world's shortest speech. He said, "I will be so brief I am already
finished," then he sat down.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:28:04 +0100, Doctor John <doc### [at] gmailcom>
wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>>
>> I think modern life is making this a bit worse :(
>
>Spoken like a true oldie!
>
Yes, I'm beginning to sound like my grandparents :)
BTW did you catch your mice?
>John (a callow youth)
Nay, a sweet faced youth :)
The Comedy of Errors, Act 5, Scene 1
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:28:04 +0100, Doctor John <doc### [at] gmailcom>
> wrote:
>
>> Stephen wrote:
>>> I think modern life is making this a bit worse :(
>> Spoken like a true oldie!
>>
> Yes, I'm beginning to sound like my grandparents :)
>
> BTW did you catch your mice?
>
Yup! No problemo!
The idiot walked straight into my trap. Prosecution to follow unless the
BoD chicken out
Details at 11
John
--
I will be brief but not nearly so brief as Salvador Dali, who gave the
world's shortest speech. He said, "I will be so brief I am already
finished," then he sat down.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Again, you are implying some kind of extreme. Exactly where did I say,
> imply or hint in any way that I didn't *like* the post which started this
> thread? The only thing did was to say I didn't understand it, nor the
> motivations behind making the post. Sure, many could (and will) interpret
> that as an impolite harsh criticism (and "bullying"), but people will
> always interpret everything in the worst possible way.
I thought it was pretty lame of you to make fun of Andrew by posting a small
C program in comparison.
Whether it's your intention or not, your posts certainly seem to be trying
to discourage him to make such postings, which is a shame. Just because you
may already know everything about nomograms and postscript coding, don't
make fun of other people who are just learning and sharing their
experiences.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was thinking, "Why would Andrew be getting a mammogram?" then I reread the title.
That would perhaps be more interesting, though. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> ---------------------
> Hey, I just wrote a C program which prints numbers from 1 to 100, with
> 10 numbers at each line:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> int main(void)
> {
> int i;
> for(i = 1; i <= 100; ++i)
> {
> printf("%i ", i);
> if(i % 10 == 0) printf("\n");
> }
> return 0;
> }
> ---------------------
Ohh, wow! That is just sooo cool. and the use of the modulus operator!
Brillant!
:D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Because they might amuse somebody...
>
> I just can't understand what's so amusing about a PDF file which contains
> some simple numbers and lines.
OK, a bit more serious now. I don't quite understand why they're
interesting either, but he felt compelled to share what he did because
someone else might be interested in it. Andrew has a profound interest
in mathematics, and perhaps here's something deeper to these nomograms
that I don't get.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kyle wrote:
> I was thinking, "Why would Andrew be getting a mammogram?" then I reread the title.
>
> That would perhaps be more interesting, though. ;-)
..........??!?
*walks away slowly*
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote:
> I thought it was pretty lame of you to make fun of Andrew by posting a small
> C program in comparison.
I still fail to see the relevant difference.
> Whether it's your intention or not, your posts certainly seem to be trying
> to discourage him to make such postings, which is a shame. Just because you
> may already know everything about nomograms and postscript coding, don't
> make fun of other people who are just learning and sharing their
> experiences.
No, I don't know anything about nomograms and little about postscript,
but the post seemed so trivial that I asked why it should be of any
interest. Is there something there I'm not seeing?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
