http://xkcd.com/344/   WTF?
http://xkcd.com/82/    Nice skills...
http://xkcd.com/346/   Hmm. LOL!
http://xkcd.com/139/   I doubt it...
http://xkcd.com/364/   ROLF!
http://xkcd.com/253/   ;-)
http://xkcd.com/235/   How utterly random!
http://xkcd.com/142/   Randomness overload.
http://xkcd.com/307/   LOLage
http://xkcd.com/198/   Ha-ha, only serious.
http://xkcd.com/169/   We've all thought it.
http://xkcd.com/277/   Probably.
http://xkcd.com/298/   I hope not...
http://xkcd.com/292/   Possible way to improve coding!
http://xkcd.com/323/   ...or this...
http://xkcd.com/108/   Extremely random.

I observe 2 interesting facts:

1. Repeatedly clicking the "random" button seems to pull up the same 
pages multiple times.

2. I have yet to find a single page I haven't already seen...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> http://xkcd.com/344/   WTF?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman
[snip]

> I observe 2 interesting facts:
> 
> 1. Repeatedly clicking the "random" button seems to pull up the same 
> pages multiple times.
> 
> 2. I have yet to find a single page I haven't already seen...
> 
Try them in order to be sure.

Post a reply to this message

Oh I only just realised that reading the cartoon image alt text is sometimes 
funny too...

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> Oh I only just realised that reading the cartoon image alt text is 
> sometimes funny too...

Sometimes funnier than the actual comic! ;-)

If you haven't already, check out the forums too. Some WEIRD CRAP in there!!

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> http://xkcd.com/344/   WTF?

"Wait, this is silly! Record company employees can't just go into 
people's houses and slice them up!"

"Ah! Clearly you haven't read the DMCA. Section 408: Authorization of 
deadly force."

"Hark! Cease this affront to freedom or stand and defend yourselves!"

"STALLMAN!!"

Having just looked this up on Wikipedia, it appears they're talking 
about a Richard Stallman, who is, as far as I can tell, a psychopath...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> "STALLMAN!!"

> Having just looked this up on Wikipedia, it appears they're talking 
> about a Richard Stallman

  I still can't believe you are a computer nerd and don't know even
the most basic things about computers.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> "STALLMAN!!"
> 
>> Having just looked this up on Wikipedia, it appears they're talking 
>> about a Richard Stallman
> 
>   I still can't believe you are a computer nerd and don't know even
> the most basic things about computers.

You what?

So if you know what a Polish reversed list is, you should also be 
familiar with various political figures? How does that work?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> So if you know what a Polish reversed list is, you should also be 
> familiar with various political figures? How does that work?

  Do you know how Bill Gates is? Do you know who Steve Jobs is? Do you know
who Donald Knuth is?
  You should know who Richard Stallman is.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> So if you know what a Polish reversed list is, you should also be 
>> familiar with various political figures? How does that work?
> 
>   Do you know how Bill Gates is?

Surely you don't even need to know what a computer is to have heard of 
the richest man on Earth.

> Do you know who Steve Jobs is?

No.

> Do you know who Donald Knuth is?

I'm told he's this legendary computer programmer. (I only know this 
because of TeX.)

>   You should know who Richard Stallman is.

Um... any reason?

Isn't that like saying if you know how a magnet works, you should know 
who Tesla is?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Isn't that like saying if you know how a magnet works, you should know 
> who Tesla is?

  No. It's like saying that you are a physicist and don't know who
Nikola Tesla is.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

>> So if you know what a Polish reversed list is, you should also be
>> familiar with various political figures? How does that work?
>
>  Do you know how Bill Gates is? Do you know who Steve Jobs is? Do you know
> who Donald Knuth is?

Yes.

>  You should know who Richard Stallman is.

No.  But I looked up his website and decided I don't like him anyway. ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Isn't that like saying if you know how a magnet works, you should know 
>> who Tesla is?
> 
>   No. It's like saying that you are a physicist and don't know who
> Nikola Tesla is.

Interesting. I had no idea that being an expert in a given subject 
involves knowing anything about its history or the people who invented it...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:48:29 -0000, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did  
spake, saying:

> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Isn't that like saying if you know how a magnet works, you should know
>> who Tesla is?
>
>   No. It's like saying that you are a physicist and don't know who
> Nikola Tesla is.

Wasn't he the guy on the Russian side in Command & Conquer that ran those  
electrical defence towers? :-)

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:50:17 +0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

>
>Interesting. I had no idea that being an expert in a given subject 
>involves knowing anything about its history or the people who invented it...

That is one of the failings of our education system. You don't need to let it
hold you back tho'.

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

> Wasn't he the guy on the Russian side in Command & Conquer that ran those 
> electrical defence towers? :-)

No I think he just got a kick out of being charged by them.  I preferred 
Tanja.

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
478f4f0a@news.povray.org...

> Interesting. I had no idea that being an expert in a given subject 
> involves knowing anything about its history or the people who invented 
> it...

An expert is expected to know about his/her field of expertise beyond the 
mere nuts and bolts so that that person can give informed advice. The 
history of a trade is part of that, but knowing history is also a proof of 
intellectual curiosity. Experts who are so narrow-minded that they can't 
reason beyond the immediate issues don't make good experts, or even good 
professionals.

G.

Post a reply to this message

>> Interesting. I had no idea that being an expert in a given subject 
>> involves knowing anything about its history or the people who invented 
>> it...
> 
> An expert is expected to know about his/her field of expertise beyond the 
> mere nuts and bolts so that that person can give informed advice. The 
> history of a trade is part of that, but knowing history is also a proof of 
> intellectual curiosity. Experts who are so narrow-minded that they can't 
> reason beyond the immediate issues don't make good experts, or even good 
> professionals.

History has never been something that really interests me, that's all.

I mean, apparently every positive integer is the product of a unique 
sequence of prime numbers. That's a pretty fascinating fact. I don't 
really care who discovered this or how, but the fact itself is pretty 
fascinating.

Mathematics fascinates me; the people who made these discoveries are 
rather irrelevant. Similarly for computers, physics, and many other 
things...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
478f6de5$1@news.povray.org...

> History has never been something that really interests me, that's all.

Well, perhaps you should expand your horizons a little bit. Knowing how 
things came to be is more than often very illuminating, even from a personal 
perspective. You're missing a lot.

Of course, from a professional perspective, be very careful about displaying 
your ignorance of trade matters. An employer just looking for some anonymous 
codemonkey may not care, but if you're looking for something a little more 
ambitious, not knowing who Steve Jobs and RMS are could be downright lethal 
in an interview, because it would reveal a deep lack of curiosity and 
interest *** in your own trade ***. For instance, not knowing about Stallman 
means that you never wondered and read about open source software licenses 
and the world of issues surrounding them. Not knowing about Steve Jobs means 
that you never got remotely interested and read anything about Apple 
software and hardware, even in mainstream newspapers.

Nothing wrong with that of course, but even if these particular points 
wouldn't interest me as an employer, I'd be wondering about the many other 
basic trade issues you'd be ignorant and unwilling to learn about, and that 
would drastically decrease your employability - once I'd picked my jaw up 
from the floor and sent a witty note my coworkers about the strange chap who 
just left my office ;)

G.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> I mean, apparently every positive integer is the product of a unique
> sequence of prime numbers. That's a pretty fascinating fact. I don't
> really care who discovered this or how, but the fact itself is pretty
> fascinating.

from there on it seems you doesn't bother either how they've come up with such
discovery in the first place.  Yes, that's how we learn:  by ignoring errors
and just accounting successes... *sarcasm off*

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran <gil### [at] agroparistechfr> wrote:
> Of course, from a professional perspective, be very careful about displaying 
> your ignorance of trade matters. An employer just looking for some anonymous 
> codemonkey may not care, but if you're looking for something a little more 
> ambitious, not knowing who Steve Jobs and RMS are could be downright lethal 
> in an interview, because it would reveal a deep lack of curiosity and 
> interest *** in your own trade ***. For instance, not knowing about Stallman 
> means that you never wondered and read about open source software licenses 
> and the world of issues surrounding them. Not knowing about Steve Jobs means 
> that you never got remotely interested and read anything about Apple 
> software and hardware, even in mainstream newspapers.

  You make an excellent point. I wholeheartedly agree with this.
I couldn't have said it better myself.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote:
> >  You should know who Richard Stallman is.

> No.  But I looked up his website and decided I don't like him anyway. ;-) 

  You don't have to like someone to know who he is. I don't like Steve
Ballmer, but I know who he is.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:

>> History has never been something that really interests me, that's all.
> 
> Well, perhaps you should expand your horizons a little bit. Knowing how 
> things came to be is more than often very illuminating, even from a personal 
> perspective. You're missing a lot.

Perhaps.

People have told me I'm missing a lot by not liking jazz music. I'm sure 
I'll get over it. ;-)

> Of course, from a professional perspective, be very careful about displaying 
> your ignorance of trade matters. An employer just looking for some anonymous 
> codemonkey may not care, but if you're looking for something a little more 
> ambitious, not knowing who Steve Jobs and RMS are could be downright lethal 
> in an interview, because it would reveal a deep lack of curiosity and 
> interest *** in your own trade ***.

Well, that's what it comes down to. You keep mentioning the "trade". I 
have no interest in the "trade" at all. I am interested in abstract 
theoretical concepts, not mundane practicalities. This is a statement of 
fact; as to what an employer would want - well that is an entire other 
question...

[This is the big reason why I see myself as a programmer - not as, say, 
a sales person, product designer or manager. I don't have the necessary 
knowledge or motivation to do those jobs.]

> For instance, not knowing about Stallman 
> means that you never wondered and read about open source software licenses 
> and the world of issues surrounding them.

False.

I'm aware of the GPL. I'm one of the [I hypothesize] very few people to 
have read it end to end. I've looked at the things it allows you to do. 
And the things it doesn't allow you to do. I'm aware that some people 
consider it far too liberal, and others consider it cripplingly 
restrictive. I just wasn't aware of who wrote it. And if you're trying 
to pick a licence, or trying to use some software released under a given 
license, does it matter who wrote it? Not really. What matters is what 
the license actually says.

[I can't claim the same familiarity with, say the BSD license - although 
I hear BSDish licenses are the other popular group.]

> Not knowing about Steve Jobs means 
> that you never got remotely interested and read anything about Apple 
> software and hardware, even in mainstream newspapers.

False.

I'm curios about Apple hardware and software. [Altough I've never 
actually met any.] I'm aware their current OS is based on Unix, and that 
their hardware was originally M68k, then PPC, and now plain Intel Core 
2. [But with custom chipsets, BIOS, etc.] And I'm aware that Apple is 
rare but has a niche following in some parts. I just don't know who this 
Steve Jobs person is... (Does it matter?)

> Nothing wrong with that of course, but even if these particular points 
> wouldn't interest me as an employer, I'd be wondering about the many other 
> basic trade issues you'd be ignorant and unwilling to learn about, and that 
> would drastically decrease your employability - once I'd picked my jaw up 
> from the floor and sent a witty note my coworkers about the strange chap who 
> just left my office ;)

If you want somebody who knows about "trade issues", then no, I'd be 
completely useless for that. If you want somebody who knows technical 
stuff... well I probably know it or can learn it. And that's a good 
start. :-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:38:39 +0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

>Gilles Tran wrote:
>
>>> History has never been something that really interests me, that's all.
>> 
>> Well, perhaps you should expand your horizons a little bit. Knowing how 
>> things came to be is more than often very illuminating, even from a personal 
>> perspective. You're missing a lot.
>
>Perhaps.
>
>People have told me I'm missing a lot by not liking jazz music. I'm sure 
>I'll get over it. ;-)

You are right about jazz but listen to Giles he is talking sense and not down. 
On a personal not if you broaden your horizons then you have more chance of
finding friends. Try it as an intellectual exercise, I don't see how it could do
any harm.

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Well, that's what it comes down to. You keep mentioning the "trade". I
> have no interest in the "trade" at all.

look, I'm brazilian and I know Gilles didn't employ the word in the way it's
generally used.  Call it your craft or whatever.

> I am interested in abstract
> theoretical concepts, not mundane practicalities.

No, I don't think you really are interested in "abstract theoretical concepts".
If you truly were interested, you'd really seek how they came to be in the first
place: the breakthroughs, old techniques not used anymore, etc.

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
478f848f$1@news.povray.org...
> False.

Frankly, I have a hard time believing that anyone who has done a minimal 
amount of reading on Apple or OSS never saw those names on screen or on 
paper. Stallman is cited *** 13 times *** in the GPL article in Wikipedia. 
Jobs is cited *** 55 times *** in the Apple article. These guys are legends 
in computing, warts and all. And the names don't ring any sort of bell to 
you?

> 2. [But with custom chipsets, BIOS, etc.] And I'm aware that Apple is rare 
> but has a niche following in some parts. I just don't know who this Steve 
> Jobs person is... (Does it matter?)

Jobs and Stallman have been major influential figures in your area of 
business/trade/expertise/whatever for more than 20 years. What they say and 
what they do has a direct influence in what you (and millions of other 
people, developers or not) do and on the way you work. Understanding (or 
trying to understand...) the philosophy that drives Stallman is a key to 
understand the GPL and the open source movement. Ditto for Jobs and what 
drives Apple. So yes, it does matter. I mean, I'm a specialist in cow and 
pig feeding and it matters to me.

In any case, the point is that showing your ignorance about things as basic 
as those can make a potential employer wonder about your overall technical 
and learning abilities, no matter how good those abilities actually are.

G.

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:

> Frankly, I have a hard time believing that anyone who has done a minimal 
> amount of reading on Apple or OSS never saw those names on screen or on 
> paper. Stallman is cited *** 13 times *** in the GPL article in Wikipedia. 
> Jobs is cited *** 55 times *** in the Apple article. These guys are legends 
> in computing, warts and all. And the names don't ring any sort of bell to 
> you?

I ignore people's names when I read about stuff?

[Most Wikipedia articles I completely skip the "history" section. It's 
just not a part that interests me very much.]

FWIW, I'm not really good with names anyway. I watched virtually the 
whole of the world darts championship this year - but I couldn't tell 
you the names of any of the players. I just watch the darts... [I'd 
probably recognise their faces though.]

> Jobs and Stallman have been major influential figures in your area of 
> business/trade/expertise/whatever for more than 20 years. What they say and 
> what they do has a direct influence in what you (and millions of other 
> people, developers or not) do and on the way you work. Understanding (or 
> trying to understand...) the philosophy that drives Stallman is a key to 
> understand the GPL and the open source movement. Ditto for Jobs and what 
> drives Apple. So yes, it does matter. I mean, I'm a specialist in cow and 
> pig feeding and it matters to me.

Interesting. I tend to think that actions rather than thoughts are what 
gets things done. I might for example look at what products Apple have 
on sale, but I wouldn't sit down and analyse "hmm, now why did they put 
an ATI card in here rather than an nVidia one? What was the underlying 
philosophical idea behind this move?" I'm just not that sort of person.

> In any case, the point is that showing your ignorance about things as basic 
> as those can make a potential employer wonder about your overall technical 
> and learning abilities, no matter how good those abilities actually are.

Allow me to put my argument concisely.

If you're saying "employers want people who know who Stallman is", then 
maybe you're right. I don't know. I haven't got a clue what employers 
actually look for. You probably know more about this than I do.

If you're saying "you're a ****ing idiot for not knowing who Stallman 
is", then I'm afraid I must disagree with you. I don't see it as being 
"morally wrong" to know of a technology and not know who invented it, in 
which year, and why they did it.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> If you're saying "you're a ****ing idiot for not knowing who Stallman
> is", then I'm afraid I must disagree with you. I don't see it as being
> "morally wrong" to know of a technology and not know who invented it, in
> which year, and why they did it.

it's not "morally wrong" being clueless.

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> If you're saying "you're a ****ing idiot for not knowing who Stallman
>> is", then I'm afraid I must disagree with you. I don't see it as being
>> "morally wrong" to know of a technology and not know who invented it, in
>> which year, and why they did it.
> 
> it's not "morally wrong" being clueless.

And not knowing every fact that can possibly be known isn't "clueless". ;-)

Nobody knows everything, so some people know some things and other 
people know others. I know things that many people don't know. Many 
people know things that I don't. It's part of what makes everybody 
different...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Nobody knows everything, so some people know some things and other
> people know others. I know things that many people don't know. Many
> people know things that I don't. It's part of what makes everybody
> different...

....and the world not too boring. :)

Nice discussion!

I *have* to join: :)

--Yes, if you are very motivated and want to show that (or not), it's very good
to know the people, who invented those things of your field (IT, trade,
science, etc) [and why and how]. You are showing interest, more than only
telling someone "it's just the way it is".
--If you "just" know the way, how and why they did come up to their theory and
you can use it for your special case/problem, it's also good.
 --But it is quite bad only to learn names, because you want to show that you
know quite a lot about a topic (but are not really interested in).
I really know, why we had to learn that Mr. X did things Y. in the year of XY,
where the people didn't have the comfort, which we are having now. But I really
can't figure out a reason, why we should learn, that Mrs. X. with name X and
surname XX pushed her man Mr. X. with Xx and helped him that way to do XXx? Or
at least I can't figure out any other reason than showing respect to that great
inventors, whose theories and technologies improved our lives...
So far to your problem of only knowing a few peoples names. :)

Regards
               bluetree

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v7" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
478f9c21$1@news.povray.org...
> Interesting. I tend to think that actions rather than thoughts are what 
> gets things done.

Because there are actions that are not backed by thoughts? Apart sex and 
digestion? You really think that people like Gates or Jobs or Ellison just 
started doing random stuff and built their little empires by chance, never 
thinking about it? And Stallman is fundamentally an ideologue. He didn't 
call the GNU Manifesto a manifesto for nothing.

> If you're saying "employers want people who know who Stallman is", then 
> maybe you're right. I don't know. I haven't got a clue what employers 
> actually look for. You probably know more about this than I do.

You still don't get it. Having a job with a certain level of qualification 
implies that you maintain a some awareness of what's going on in your area 
of expertise. Keeping track of major trends and what drives them and knowing 
who is who in your trade is part of being a professional. This is *** 
expected *** in any job that entails expertise.

>If you're saying "you're a ****ing idiot for not knowing who Stallman is", 
>then I'm afraid I must disagree with you. I don't see it as being "morally 
>wrong" to know of a technology and not know who invented it, in which year, 
>and why they did it.

The problem is not about *** being *** a idiot, it's about not *** sounding 
*** like one. I can understand your total lack of interest in certain 
matters, but don't expect the same sort of benevolent complacency from your 
professional peers, including potential employeers. Of course if you want to 
keep saying the darnest things, just do it.

G.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> And I'm aware that Apple is 
> rare but has a niche following in some parts.

  Really? Have you heard of this thing called "iPod"? Are you aware of
its market share? Do you know which company produces it?

  Have you followed the marketshare of this thing called "iPhone" in
the US? Do you know how many people use an Apple computer in the US?

  "Rare" and "niche following" aren't quite close to the truth.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Mathematics fascinates me; the people who made these discoveries are 
> rather irrelevant. Similarly for computers, physics, and many other 
> things...

Except when they're still alive and vocally influencing your 
professional field.

It's like saying you're uninterested in learning about the history of 
politics, so there's no reason to know who the current leader of your 
country is, or what wars your country is currently engaged in.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     It's not feature creep if you put it
     at the end and adjust the release date.

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:
> Of course if you want to keep saying the darnest things, just do it.

It can be helpful to learn how to BS on a topic you know virtually 
nothing about. Then you spend an hour reading a half-dozen wikipedia 
pages, and now you can sound like an expert in them too. ;-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     It's not feature creep if you put it
     at the end and adjust the release date.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Gilles Tran wrote:
>> Of course if you want to keep saying the darnest things, just do it.
> 
> It can be helpful to learn how to BS on a topic you know virtually 
> nothing about. Then you spend an hour reading a half-dozen wikipedia 
> pages, and now you can sound like an expert in them too. ;-)

Except when Wikipedia is wrong... ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> And I'm aware that Apple is 
>> rare but has a niche following in some parts.
> 
>   Really? Have you heard of this thing called "iPod"? Are you aware of
> its market share? Do you know which company produces it?

Last time I checked, an iPod isn't a Mac. What I meant is that the Apple 
Mac is a niche following.

>   Have you followed the marketshare of this thing called "iPhone" in
> the US? Do you know how many people use an Apple computer in the US?

I'm aware Apple is trying really hard to tell the iPhone. I haven't 
heard anybody with anything nice to say about it, so I had presumed that 
it's not doing too well...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> Mathematics fascinates me; the people who made these discoveries are 
>> rather irrelevant. Similarly for computers, physics, and many other 
>> things...
> 
> Except when they're still alive and vocally influencing your 
> professional field.
> 
> It's like saying you're uninterested in learning about the history of 
> politics, so there's no reason to know who the current leader of your 
> country is, or what wars your country is currently engaged in.

Random fact: I know who the 11th president of the USA was, but I have no 
idea what the name of the PM of the UK is...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:

>> Interesting. I tend to think that actions rather than thoughts are what 
>> gets things done.
> 
> Because there are actions that are not backed by thoughts?

No - I just meant that thinking about something doesn't make anything 
happen. Performin actions makes things happen. I tend to focus on the 
actions that companies take, rather than the individuals who thought of 
them, or why.

>> If you're saying "employers want people who know who Stallman is", then 
>> maybe you're right. I don't know. I haven't got a clue what employers 
>> actually look for. You probably know more about this than I do.
> 
> You still don't get it. Having a job with a certain level of qualification 
> implies that you maintain a some awareness of what's going on in your area 
> of expertise.

My area of expertise is computer technology, not economics or business 
climate or whatever the latest buzzword for it is. That's all.

> This is *** expected *** in any job that entails expertise.

As I said, maybe you're right. I don't really know.

> The problem is not about *** being *** a idiot, it's about not *** sounding 
> *** like one.

OK, fair enough.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> a écrit dans le message de news: 
479008ec$1@news.povray.org...
> Gilles Tran wrote:
>> Of course if you want to keep saying the darnest things, just do it.
>
> It can be helpful to learn how to BS on a topic you know virtually nothing 
> about. Then you spend an hour reading a half-dozen wikipedia pages, and 
> now you can sound like an expert in them too. ;-)

It sometimes happens that I have someone on the phone asking me stuff that 
I'm mostly ignorant about, while I'm frantically googling about it in real 
time and providing answers as they appear on screen. There's no point trying 
to hide it (people can hear the clicking anyway) but as a rule, answering 
"uh, dude, what are you talking about, never heard about that" is not an 
option.
The ability to assimilate lots of new info in a very short time is part of 
the engineering training here (there's an exam where the student is given a 
full paper and asked to summarize it in a few minutes).

G.

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> I'm aware Apple is trying really hard to tell the iPhone. I haven't 
> heard anybody with anything nice to say about it, so I had presumed that 
> it's not doing too well...

  Yeah. The Time Magazine naming it invention of the year, and 5 million
units sold in a half year, taking over 15% of the smart phone market in
the US certainly means "it's not doing too well".

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v7" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
479073b2$1@news.povray.org...

> Random fact: I know who the 11th president of the USA was, but I have no 
> idea what the name of the PM of the UK is...

Hmm, well. From what you say, you're not willing to understand the world 
(and particularly people), except for the bits of trivia that do interest 
you, and the occasional pair of mammaries that floats, sadly out of reach, 
in your field of vision. Of course, you're fully entitled to do that. 
However, keep in mind that by willingly shutting out the rest of the world, 
you're actually shutting yourself in. If you're making the world - which is 
made from something else than fancy algorithms - invisible to you, you can't 
complain that you are invisible to it. That's a two-way relationship. 
Abstruse programming languages make poor friends.

Let's quote John Donne, fellow brothers: "No man is an island, entire of 
itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main".

G.

Post a reply to this message

> but I have no 
> idea what the name of the PM of the UK is...

Now there really is no excuse for that one...

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:56:26 +0100, "Gilles Tran" <gitran_nospam_@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

>Let's quote John Donne

I somehow don't think that quoting a Jacobean poet however relevant will
illustrate what you mean.

Andrew, or do you prefer Andy? Do you understand what people are trying to say
to you? Could you summarise it?

Odds of a mars bar to anything this is ignored. 

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran <gitran_nospam_@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> Let's quote John Donne, fellow brothers: "No man is an island, entire of 
> itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main".

  "We are the Borg. Resistance is futile." ;)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:32:04 -0000, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did  
spake, saying:

> Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> I'm aware Apple is trying really hard to tell the iPhone. I haven't
>> heard anybody with anything nice to say about it, so I had presumed that
>> it's not doing too well...
>
>   Yeah. The Time Magazine naming it invention of the year,

Oo did they have Putin, their man of the year, holding it?

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> a écrit dans le message de news: 
47909d01@news.povray.org...
> Gilles Tran <gitran_nospam_@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>> Let's quote John Donne, fellow brothers: "No man is an island, entire of
>> itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main".
>
>  "We are the Borg. Resistance is futile." ;)

True. Perhaps someone should just collect Andrew's darnest quotes and put 
them on a webpage somewhere to preserve them for the posterity.

In fact, perhaps Andrew himself could put them on his blog, that would sure 
get him some readers and drive traffic to his site, up to the point he'd be 
able to make a living from out of selling ad space ;) (I'm only half-joking, 
because he's actually good at writing and one could put a positive spin at 
stuff like "I never heard of this Steve Jobs fellow and really don't care").

G.

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> Oo did they have Putin, their man of the year, holding it?

  Their "man of the year" doesn't mean "the person who has made most good
in the world", but "the person who has been most significant in the world,
who has had most impact", in good or bad.

  In the year 1938 they chose Adolph Hitler as the person of the year,
and in the year 1939 Joseph Stalin. Not because they did something good
for the world, but because they were considered some of the most influential
persons (in good or bad).

  You are clearly trying to diminish the importance of Time Magazine's
titles by implying that the choice of Putin as person of the year shows
some kind of incompetence, but it only shows that you don't understand
what they mean by "person of the year".

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:56:26 +0100, "Gilles Tran" <gitran_nospam_@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

>you, and the occasional pair of mammaries that floats, sadly out of reach, 
>in your field of vision. 

Damn!  I just shot coffee out of my nose.  That was funny.

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:57:24 -0000, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did  
spake, saying:

> Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>> Oo did they have Putin, their man of the year, holding it?
>
>   Their "man of the year" doesn't mean "the person who has made most good
> in the world", but "the person who has been most significant in the  
> world,
> who has had most impact", in good or bad.
>
>   In the year 1938 they chose Adolph Hitler as the person of the year,
> and in the year 1939 Joseph Stalin. Not because they did something good
> for the world, but because they were considered some of the most  
> influential
> persons (in good or bad).
>
>   You are clearly trying to diminish the importance of Time Magazine's
> titles by implying that the choice of Putin as person of the year shows
> some kind of incompetence, but it only shows that you don't understand
> what they mean by "person of the year".

Actually I do, and by that measure making the iPhone the invention of the  
year doesn't necessarily make it any good, or popular, or used.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> Actually I do, and by that measure making the iPhone the invention of the  
> year doesn't necessarily make it any good, or popular, or used.

  I'm not saying you are this kind of person, but I have noticed that
there are many people who, for whatever reason I cannot really comprehend,
vehemently oppose Apple and its innovations by principle.

  When I made a comment about Apple's new laptop in an IRC channel,
immediately one person jumped out with completely negative responses
about it. When I presented some innovative and cool features of that
laptop and other Apple products, he attacked each one of them ferociously
and vehemently, trying to diminish every single feature and innovation.
And mind you, this was *not* a Windows user or Microsoft fan.

  In my experience this kind of negative attitude towards Apple and most
of its products and innovations seems rather puzzling. It raises the big
question of why. The amount of opposition against Apple and its products
with these people even surpasses the amount and strength of the opposition
against Microsoft's products by the most fanatic linux advocates. Not even
the most fanatic of them care to go through Microsoft's products and point
by point crush anything that could be good or innovative about them (but
the more typical behavior is to simply bash Microsoft's products in a way
more general way).

  In my experience it's more usual that precisely *linux* people oppose
Apple more vehemently than Windows people (the latter usually have more
of an attitude like "yeah, sounds cool, but I'm not really interested",
aside from the typical myths which are no longer true).

  I just can't understand why this is. Is it bad that another company
besides Microsoft is getting some market share? Is it bad that there's
a company which really tries to make a difference, which tries to be
innovative? Is it bad that Microsoft is getting serious competition?

  I get the feeling that in some cases these people seem to think that
linux (and open source software in general) should have the exclusive
right to compete against Microsoft.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:00:28 -0000, scott <sco### [at] laptopcom> did  
spake, saying:

>> but I have no idea what the name of the PM of the UK is...
>
> Now there really is no excuse for that one...

Especially when it makes such a good song

Gordon Brown taxes us all. Sets us up to take the fall. Throughout the  
night. No way to fight. We'll all just drown with Gordon Brown.

Okay without cheating (honest)

UK: Brown himself duh.
US: Bush duh.
Veneuzala: Chavez
Zimbabwe: Mugabe
Pakistan: Moustachio er Musharaf
North Korea: Kim in Pajamas, oo I am so on his list now. Kim Jong Il
France: Um yeah, bloke who beat the women in the election, met Bush. S...?  
No sorry
Russia: Pooty Putin.
Iran: I could pick his face out of a line-up, but as to name...? Nope.

Okay not good, but a) I'm really not good with names anyway, and b) If you  
said how could you not know ? was the head of ? I'd be thumping my  
forehead and saying yes of course it is for quite a few others.

Then again I do know who Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Richard Stallman, and Tim  
Berners-Lee are.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message