 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Picture this:
You're in a busy shopping centre. Suddenly people start screaming. You
don't know why... and then you feel dizzy, fall to the ground, and pass out.
When you awake, you find yourself surrounded by dead people. Everybody
in the place is stone-dead. You are apparently the only person left alive.
You call the emergency services, but nobody answers. You run out to the
car park. You drive home. Everywhere you see wrecked cars full of dead
people. Paths and sidewalks littered with corpses. Their horrified faces
and vacant expressions haunt you.
You drive to your home. Your entire family is dead. You grab your phone
and try to call every single person you can think of. Nobody answers.
You drive to see your relatives. Every major road is like a train wreck.
Mangled vehicles everywhere. And dead people. Lots of dead people. Every
person you go to visit is dead, or their house is simply empty.
You get on the Internet. You check every website you can think of. There
is no mention of the inexplicable catastrophe which has befallen the
region. You send emails, you leave messages on forums; nobody replies.
You call some folks you know who live in another country, but still no
answer.
Slowly it begins to dawn on you that you are, apparently, the very last
human alive on this Earth. And now you feel scared. Really scared.
Society as you know it no longer exists. Your world is over. Everything
you ever cared about, gone. Forever. Every person you ever met, everyone
who ever mattered to you. They're all dead. And you never even got to
say goodbye.
Yesterday you were worried about some stupid computer problem. Today,
pushing 1s and 0s around inside a computer suddenly seems... irrelevant.
Pointless. Obsolete. Trivial.
Suddenly you find yourself in dire circumstances, and there is
absolutely no-one you can turn to. Everybody is dead. And you don't even
know /why/. Does it even matter? You'll surely be joining them soon. The
phones and the water and the electricity still seem to be working right
/now/. But for how much longer? They won't run themselves forever. And
you won't last long without drinking water, or heating for the winter
months. With no people around, you can walk into the nearest shop and
take whatever food you like. But how many months before all that becomes
inedible?
You always wanted a nicer car. Now you can take any god-damned car you
like. Go to a warehouse and cart off stackloads of computer gear. Hell,
you can have your own personal datacenter. Who's going to stop you? And
you don't even have to /take/ it anywhere. You can live wherever you
want. It doesn't even have to be a /house/. It can be anything you want.
In any city, anywhere. You can literally own anything you want.
But what's the point? You're going to be dead very shortly. Sure, you
can drive over to Google and use their entire datacenter as a giant
render farm. But why bother? What /use/ is it? You're still going to be
alone /forever/. And you're still going to die a slow, lingering death
by starvation, terrified and alone...
Worst.
Dream.
EVER.
>_<
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 21.09.2011 10:54, schrieb Invisible:
> Worst.
>
> Dream.
>
> EVER.
>
> >_<
Would make an interesting plot for a feature-length movie though.
Oh, wait...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Quiet_Earth_%28film%29
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/09/2011 11:20 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 21.09.2011 10:54, schrieb Invisible:
>
>> Worst.
>>
>> Dream.
>>
>> EVER.
>>
>> >_<
>
> Would make an interesting plot for a feature-length movie though.
Or, a FRIGGING TERRIFYING plot for a movie...
> Oh, wait...
What? Oh yeah - this is the plot for every apocalypse story every
written. :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 21/09/2011 10:54, Invisible a écrit :
> And you're still going to die a slow, lingering death by starvation,
> terrified and alone...
>
You should have been using more attention to the farming tutorials.
Assuming the electrical system is still working, you can first establish
yourself in a mega-market near some fields.
hunger and thirst would be filled with the frozen & canned foods of the
mega-market. This gives you a few months to start exploiting the nearby
fields the traditional way.
You'd better start cleaning the area around of all corpses, as it will
soon stink a lot. Sanitizing about 1 kilometre radius should keep you
busy while the vegetables are growing in the fields. A great fire is
probably the best disposable way, and it leaves ashes full of potassium,
a great fertilizer for most plants.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/21/2011 3:54 AM, Invisible wrote:
>
>
> Worst.
>
> Dream.
>
> EVER.
>
> >_<
Omega man?
Is it bad that when I read this my first thought was ... man, in a few
days, it's gonna really stink.
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/09/2011 01:05 PM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 21/09/2011 10:54, Invisible a écrit :
>> And you're still going to die a slow, lingering death by starvation,
>> terrified and alone...
>
> You should have been using more attention to the farming tutorials.
As a practical matter, I don't think it's feasible to practise
one-person agriculture.
In pre-industrial times, it took entire villages to bring in the year's
crop. Admittedly I don't need to feed an entire village, but all the same...
> Assuming the electrical system is still working, you can first establish
> yourself in a mega-market near some fields.
> hunger and thirst would be filled with the frozen& canned foods of the
> mega-market. This gives you a few months to start exploiting the nearby
> fields the traditional way.
Shops and other venues with high densities of food would appear the
logical place to start. Plus, if it turns out that I'm *not* the last
person alive, this is the place were I am most likely to discover over
survivors. (Now debate whether this is a good or bad thing...)
The real question is "what happens when the shelves run out?" Given that
I only eat meat and dairy products, there's going to be kind of a
problem. Yes, it's probably not /that/ hard to grow lettuce. On the
other hand, you would have to be *really* hungry to consider eating
lettuce. I mean, like, you would have to be literally about to *die* of
hunger... (Plus, I gather that lettuce is 100% water, so the nearest 3
decimal places anyway.)
> You'd better start cleaning the area around of all corpses, as it will
> soon stink a lot. Sanitizing about 1 kilometre radius should keep you
> busy while the vegetables are growing in the fields.
Do you have any idea how large a 1 km radius is?
Last time I tried it, it took about 8 hours to talk a distance which (we
were told) was 5 miles. Since that's about 8 km, that makes typical
walking speed equal to roughly 1 km/hour. Now work out how long it'll
take to traverse almost one square km. (!)
Now, I don't know if you know this, but adult humans are actually
/heavy/. Like, *really* heavy. Way heavier than you'd imagine. Even the
skinny ones. Moving just a few of them would be quite a lot of work.
> A great fire is
> probably the best disposable way, and it leaves ashes full of potassium,
> a great fertilizer for most plants.
There's a few problems with this.
Most of the modern landscape isn't especially flammable. People don't
live in wooden houses, they live in constructs of brick, glass, concrete
and steel. None of which is especially flammable.
For this kind of thing to make sense, you'd really need all the bodies
in one place. That's still a hell of a lot of work.
Try not to kill yourself with the toxic fumes. It may produce a lot of
ash, but given all the plastics involved, it's probably loaded with
carcinogens and so forth.
Realistically, it might be better to just find a sparsely-populated
area. But then there won't be too many shops around...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Poe really makes an impression on people, huh?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 21.09.2011 14:05, schrieb Le_Forgeron:
> You should have been using more attention to the farming tutorials.
>
> Assuming the electrical system is still working, you can first establish
> yourself in a mega-market near some fields.
> hunger and thirst would be filled with the frozen& canned foods of the
> mega-market. This gives you a few months to start exploiting the nearby
> fields the traditional way.
If animals are still alive, hunting would be an alternative. Game will
soon be abundant if you're not picky and don't mind eating rodents or dogs.
But never mind that - chances are you won't need food for long anyway;
tinned food lasts a few years, and by then the environmental
catastrophes resulting from unattended chemical, petrochemical, nuclear
and what-have-you plants might be spoiling all the fun already.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/09/2011 2:24 PM, Invisible wrote:
> Yes, it's probably not /that/ hard to grow lettuce. On the other hand,
> you would have to be *really* hungry to consider eating lettuce. I mean,
> like, you would have to be literally about to *die* of hunger... (Plus,
> I gather that lettuce is 100% water, so the nearest 3 decimal places
> anyway.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lettuce#Nutrition o_O
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/09/2011 07:08 PM, Stephen wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lettuce#Nutrition o_O
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=lettuce
175 MILLIgrams of fat.
1 gram protein.
Looking at the second table, it gives you 93% of your GDA for vitamin A,
and about 1% of your GDA for everything else. :-P
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> If animals are still alive, hunting would be an alternative. Game will
> soon be abundant if you're not picky and don't mind eating rodents or dogs.
I'm thinking... entire cities full of dead meat are going to attract a
lot of wildlife? I'm not sure which kinds - presumably birds, foxes, and
stray pets like cats and dogs. I suppose maybe rats too.
> But never mind that - chances are you won't need food for long anyway;
> tinned food lasts a few years, and by then the environmental
> catastrophes resulting from unattended chemical, petrochemical, nuclear
> and what-have-you plants might be spoiling all the fun already.
Yeah, I'm wondering exactly how long an unattented power plant,
telephone exchange or water plant will continue functioning... Somebody
somewhere probably has data for this.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/09/2011 06:02 PM, nemesis wrote:
> Poe really makes an impression on people, huh?
Who?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/09/2011 09:51 PM, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> On 21/09/2011 06:02 PM, nemesis wrote:
>> Poe really makes an impression on people, huh?
>
> Who?
Sorry, I couldn't keep a straight face any more. :-D
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> On 21/09/2011 09:51 PM, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> > On 21/09/2011 06:02 PM, nemesis wrote:
> >> Poe really makes an impression on people, huh?
> >
> > Who?
>
> Sorry, I couldn't keep a straight face any more. :-D
damn, I had the proper links already for your instruction...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>>> Poe really makes an impression on people, huh?
>>>
>>> Who?
>>
>> Sorry, I couldn't keep a straight face any more. :-D
>
> damn, I had the proper links already for your instruction...
Does anyone know what The Raven became so popular?
Or how it actually makes comprehensible /sense/, for that matter? It
seems to be a fairly random collection of sentences that collectively
don't seem to /mean/ anything...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 21.09.2011 22:51, schrieb Orchid XP v8:
>> If animals are still alive, hunting would be an alternative. Game will
>> soon be abundant if you're not picky and don't mind eating rodents or
>> dogs.
>
> I'm thinking... entire cities full of dead meat are going to attract a
> lot of wildlife? I'm not sure which kinds - presumably birds, foxes, and
> stray pets like cats and dogs. I suppose maybe rats too.
As I said: Rodents and dogs.
>> But never mind that - chances are you won't need food for long anyway;
>> tinned food lasts a few years, and by then the environmental
>> catastrophes resulting from unattended chemical, petrochemical, nuclear
>> and what-have-you plants might be spoiling all the fun already.
>
> Yeah, I'm wondering exactly how long an unattented power plant,
> telephone exchange or water plant will continue functioning... Somebody
> somewhere probably has data for this.
Yes, I've read an article about that. Don't know where though.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 22:13:02 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>>> Poe really makes an impression on people, huh?
>>>>
>>>> Who?
>>>
>>> Sorry, I couldn't keep a straight face any more. :-D
>>
>> damn, I had the proper links already for your instruction...
>
> Does anyone know what The Raven became so popular?
>
> Or how it actually makes comprehensible /sense/, for that matter? It
> seems to be a fairly random collection of sentences that collectively
> don't seem to /mean/ anything...
"Quoth the raven, 'eat my shorts!'"
Best version *ever*.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I'm thinking... entire cities full of dead meat are going to attract a
>> lot of wildlife? I'm not sure which kinds - presumably birds, foxes, and
>> stray pets like cats and dogs. I suppose maybe rats too.
>
> As I said: Rodents and dogs.
I'm thinking lots of cities have crazy cat women. So there would
definitely be cats too. ;-)
>> Yeah, I'm wondering exactly how long an unattented power plant,
>> telephone exchange or water plant will continue functioning... Somebody
>> somewhere probably has data for this.
>
> Yes, I've read an article about that. Don't know where though.
I *hate* it when that happens...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Does anyone know what The Raven became so popular?
>>
>> Or how it actually makes comprehensible /sense/, for that matter? It
>> seems to be a fairly random collection of sentences that collectively
>> don't seem to /mean/ anything...
>
> "Quoth the raven, 'eat my shorts!'"
>
> Best version *ever*.
LOL.
This one is better:
http://bash.org/?120296
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/21/2011 13:51, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Yeah, I'm wondering exactly how long an unattented power plant, telephone
> exchange or water plant will continue functioning... Somebody somewhere
> probably has data for this.
For the Bell system as it existed back in 1990 or so, the estimate is that
it would run 17 years before the network would have a major partition, as
long as nobody dicked around with it.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
How come I never get only one kudo?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/21/2011 14:13, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> to be a fairly random collection of sentences that collectively don't seem
> to /mean/ anything...
A man's wife, Lenore, had recently passed away. Now he's contemplating
suicide. Now read the poem again.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
How come I never get only one kudo?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22/09/2011 04:37 PM, Darren New wrote:
> On 9/21/2011 14:13, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> to be a fairly random collection of sentences that collectively don't
>> seem to /mean/ anything...
>
> A man's wife, Lenore, had recently passed away. Now he's contemplating
> suicide. Now read the poem again.
Oh, wait, "lenore" is a name??
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 escreveu:
> On 22/09/2011 04:37 PM, Darren New wrote:
>> On 9/21/2011 14:13, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> to be a fairly random collection of sentences that collectively don't
>>> seem to /mean/ anything...
>>
>> A man's wife, Lenore, had recently passed away. Now he's contemplating
>> suicide. Now read the poem again.
>
> Oh, wait, "lenore" is a name??
oh god...
Try harder Andrew. Poems are not that different from computer programs
written in a natural language. There's structure, metric, rules and,
thanks to a rich ambiguous natural language, much margin for
interpretation. It's fun and enjoyable...
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22/09/2011 6:52 PM, nemesis wrote:
>>> A man's wife, Lenore, had recently passed away. Now he's contemplating
>>> suicide. Now read the poem again.
>>
>> Oh, wait, "lenore" is a name??
>
> oh god...
You wouldn't credit it. ^^
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:15:48 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>> Does anyone know what The Raven became so popular?
>>>
>>> Or how it actually makes comprehensible /sense/, for that matter? It
>>> seems to be a fairly random collection of sentences that collectively
>>> don't seem to /mean/ anything...
>>
>> "Quoth the raven, 'eat my shorts!'"
>>
>> Best version *ever*.
>
> LOL.
>
> This one is better:
>
> http://bash.org/?120296
It's not bad, but the reading on The Simpsons still is top of my list.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> oh god...
>
> You wouldn't credit it. ^^
According to my Latin dictionary:
"credo" "I believe"
Does anybody /else/ think it's weird that the Romans are the people who
hunted down and murdered Jesus Christ, and yet all the most official
Christian stuff is written in Latin?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Oh, wait, "lenore" is a name??
>
> oh god...
>
> Try harder Andrew.
Actually, I looked up the poem, and it turns out it's actually longer
than the 4 random verses that usually get quoted. If you read the whole
thing, it does make a greater semblance of sense.
I still don't actually /like/ it though. Obviously.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/09/2011 10:57 AM, Invisible wrote:
> Does anybody /else/ think it's weird that the Romans are the people who
> hunted down and murdered Jesus Christ, and yet all the most official
> Christian stuff is written in Latin?
No, the Romans did not hunt him down. It was the High Priest who
arrested him, tried him in the Sanhedrin before sending him to Pontius
Pilatus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin_Trial_of_Jesus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontius_Pilate#Pilate_in_the_canonical_Gospel_accounts
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2011/09/27 05:57, Invisible a écrit :
>>> oh god...
>>
>> You wouldn't credit it. ^^
>
> According to my Latin dictionary:
>
> "credo" "I believe"
>
> Does anybody /else/ think it's weird that the Romans are the people who
> hunted down and murdered Jesus Christ, and yet all the most official
> Christian stuff is written in Latin?
For about 3 centuries, it was a prety common pastime to hunt down and
execute christians just about everywhere. Things started to change
around the 4th century when the first Roman Emperor actualy converted to
christianity. It's about during that time frame that the new testament
was finaly put down in writing...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Does anybody /else/ think it's weird that the Romans are the people who
>> hunted down and murdered Jesus Christ, and yet all the most official
>> Christian stuff is written in Latin?
>
> For about 3 centuries, it was a prety common pastime to hunt down and
> execute christians just about everywhere. Things started to change
> around the 4th century when the first Roman Emperor actualy converted to
> christianity. It's about during that time frame that the new testament
> was finaly put down in writing...
OK, and now I'm wondering what the hell Christianity was called before
Jesus Christ was born. :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 28/09/2011 10:08, Invisible a écrit :
> now I'm wondering what the hell Christianity was called before Jesus
> Christ was born.
It's even worst, only the last three years or so did he preach.
And Jesus Christ was not born. Jesus was born.
(Christ is a literal translation of Messiah in hebrew and it is usually
related to an onction)
At best, Jesus Christ starts with John the Baptiste in a river...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2011/09/28 04:24, Le_Forgeron a écrit :
> Le 28/09/2011 10:08, Invisible a écrit :
>> now I'm wondering what the hell Christianity was called before Jesus
>> Christ was born.
>
> It's even worst, only the last three years or so did he preach.
> And Jesus Christ was not born. Jesus was born.
> (Christ is a literal translation of Messiah in hebrew and it is usually
> related to an onction)
> At best, Jesus Christ starts with John the Baptiste in a river...
>
>
Now, in the nativity, it's stated that it was during a Roman census.
There was NO census around year 1.
There was one about 30 years earlier, and another 15 years later...
And, there have never been a year zero... Try to write 0 in the Roman
numbers that where used when our calendar was established. That's why a
century start on year xx01 and not xx00.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/09/2011 07:14 PM, Alain wrote:
> And, there have never been a year zero... Try to write 0 in the Roman
> numbers that where used when our calendar was established. That's why a
> century start on year xx01 and not xx00.
Oh, that's nothing. I just found a piece of paper containing a story
which I apparently wrote in "MXCIXIV AD".
Anybody wanna take a stab at what frigging year that is??
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 21:35:09 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> On 28/09/2011 07:14 PM, Alain wrote:
>
>> And, there have never been a year zero... Try to write 0 in the Roman
>> numbers that where used when our calendar was established. That's why a
>> century start on year xx01 and not xx00.
>
> Oh, that's nothing. I just found a piece of paper containing a story
> which I apparently wrote in "MXCIXIV AD".
>
> Anybody wanna take a stab at what frigging year that is??
1994 is what you meant, but that's not what you wrote. ;)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:59:07 -0400, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Anybody wanna take a stab at what frigging year that is??
>
> 1994 is what you meant, but that's not what you wrote. ;)
But 1103 is what you wrote, at least according to one converter I found.
I'm guessing "IX" and "IV" were added together to give "XIII" or "XIIV"
by the converter).
MCMXCIV is what you were trying for. ;)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29/09/2011 01:31 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:59:07 -0400, Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>>> Anybody wanna take a stab at what frigging year that is??
>>
>> 1994 is what you meant, but that's not what you wrote. ;)
>
> But 1103 is what you wrote, at least according to one converter I found.
I think you'll find that what I wrote is invalid, and hence has no
defined value.
> MCMXCIV is what you were trying for. ;)
Hmm... 1994... So I was 14? Yeah, that would explain why I was stupid. >_<
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:17:59 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> On 29/09/2011 01:31 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:59:07 -0400, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>
>>>> Anybody wanna take a stab at what frigging year that is??
>>>
>>> 1994 is what you meant, but that's not what you wrote. ;)
>>
>> But 1103 is what you wrote, at least according to one converter I
>> found.
>
> I think you'll find that what I wrote is invalid, and hence has no
> defined value.
Well, yes, that's what I found - but the converter I found actually came
back with a value.
>> MCMXCIV is what you were trying for. ;)
>
> Hmm... 1994... So I was 14? Yeah, that would explain why I was stupid.
> >_<
I would say "young and inexperienced". Unless you still think that's a
valid value? ;)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Hmm... 1994... So I was 14? Yeah, that would explain why I was stupid.
>>> _<
>
> I would say "young and inexperienced". Unless you still think that's a
> valid value? ;)
I was a very stupid child.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure that much has improved. :-(
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 19:26:22 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> Hmm... 1994... So I was 14? Yeah, that would explain why I was stupid.
>>>> _<
>>
>> I would say "young and inexperienced". Unless you still think that's a
>> valid value? ;)
>
> I was a very stupid child.
>
> Unfortunately, I'm not sure that much has improved. :-(
You have a hunger to learn things. Stupid people don't do that. Stupid
people are content with what they know and aren't curious about anything.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/27/2011 12:45, Alain wrote:
> For about 3 centuries, it was a prety common pastime to hunt down and
> execute christians just about everywhere. Things started to change around
> the 4th century when the first Roman Emperor actualy converted to
> christianity.
... at which time christians started hunting down and executing everyone
else. ;-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
How come I never get only one kudo?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I was a very stupid child.
>>
>> Unfortunately, I'm not sure that much has improved. :-(
>
> You have a hunger to learn things. Stupid people don't do that. Stupid
> people are content with what they know and aren't curious about anything.
Even stupid people can be enthusiastic about stuff.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/30/2011 2:58 AM, Invisible wrote:
>>> I was a very stupid child.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, I'm not sure that much has improved. :-(
>>
>> You have a hunger to learn things. Stupid people don't do that. Stupid
>> people are content with what they know and aren't curious about anything.
>
> Even stupid people can be enthusiastic about stuff.
Jim's right, you know. You are not stupid. You've supplied plenty of
evidence to the contrary here.
Stupid people don't talk about calculus, haskell, pov-ray and other
things. Stupid people sit and stare at the TV, watching to see whether
[insert current attractive celebrity here] is gonna show it all or not
or marry [insert other idiot celebrity who's gone through 25 marriages
already], or had sex with [insert random person] or just plopped out a
baby while flying on their own private lear jet. etc ...
Stupid people don't concern themselves with such banalities as quantum
theory, integration, derivatives, signal processing or information theory.
Stupid people just want to push the shiny red button and see the sparkly
things.
You, sir, are not a stupid person.
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Even stupid people can be enthusiastic about stuff.
>
> Jim's right, you know. You are not stupid. You've supplied plenty of
> evidence to the contrary here.
>
> Stupid people don't talk about calculus, haskell, pov-ray and other
> things. Stupid people sit and stare at the TV, watching to see whether
> [insert current attractive celebrity here] is gonna show it all or not
> or marry [insert other idiot celebrity who's gone through 25 marriages
> already], or had sex with [insert random person] or just plopped out a
> baby while flying on their own private lear jet. etc ...
>
> Stupid people don't concern themselves with such banalities as quantum
> theory, integration, derivatives, signal processing or information theory.
>
> Stupid people just want to push the shiny red button and see the sparkly
> things.
>
> You, sir, are not a stupid person.
We do occasionally get ex-Java programmers turn up on the Haskell IRC
channel who've read about Haskell, are really excited about it, and also
have the attention span on a goldfish.
Required Bash quote: http://bash.org/?22094
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 10:18:41 -0500, Mike Raiford wrote:
> On 9/30/2011 2:58 AM, Invisible wrote:
>>>> I was a very stupid child.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, I'm not sure that much has improved. :-(
>>>
>>> You have a hunger to learn things. Stupid people don't do that. Stupid
>>> people are content with what they know and aren't curious about
>>> anything.
>>
>> Even stupid people can be enthusiastic about stuff.
>
> Jim's right, you know. You are not stupid. You've supplied plenty of
> evidence to the contrary here.
>
> Stupid people don't talk about calculus, haskell, pov-ray and other
> things. Stupid people sit and stare at the TV, watching to see whether
> [insert current attractive celebrity here] is gonna show it all or not
> or marry [insert other idiot celebrity who's gone through 25 marriages
> already], or had sex with [insert random person] or just plopped out a
> baby while flying on their own private lear jet. etc ...
>
> Stupid people don't concern themselves with such banalities as quantum
> theory, integration, derivatives, signal processing or information
> theory.
>
> Stupid people just want to push the shiny red button and see the sparkly
> things.
>
> You, sir, are not a stupid person.
What Mike said. :)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:50:10 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>> Even stupid people can be enthusiastic about stuff.
>>
>> Jim's right, you know. You are not stupid. You've supplied plenty of
>> evidence to the contrary here.
>>
>> Stupid people don't talk about calculus, haskell, pov-ray and other
>> things. Stupid people sit and stare at the TV, watching to see whether
>> [insert current attractive celebrity here] is gonna show it all or not
>> or marry [insert other idiot celebrity who's gone through 25 marriages
>> already], or had sex with [insert random person] or just plopped out a
>> baby while flying on their own private lear jet. etc ...
>>
>> Stupid people don't concern themselves with such banalities as quantum
>> theory, integration, derivatives, signal processing or information
>> theory.
>>
>> Stupid people just want to push the shiny red button and see the
>> sparkly things.
>>
>> You, sir, are not a stupid person.
>
> We do occasionally get ex-Java programmers turn up on the Haskell IRC
> channel who've read about Haskell, are really excited about it, and also
> have the attention span on a goldfish.
>
> Required Bash quote: http://bash.org/?22094
Short attention spans are not an indicator of one's intelligence. Ask
anyone who has ADD or ADHD. My son went to a school that specialized in
working with highly intelligent students with learning disabilities -
which is ADD/ADHD. Some incredibly bright kids - Ken among them - who
just couldn't focus.
One of the most fascinating discussions I've ever had was with one of his
classmates - Will described what it was like living in his head, and how
frustrating it could be to not be able to focus on one thing. What he
said was one of the most eloquent ways I'd ever heard it put.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Worst.
>
> Dream.
>
> EVER.
>
> >_<
Several people have commented on how you might or might not survive a
catastrophy like this. What nobody seems to have much to say about is
what would happen to your sanity if you were faced with a thousand
million glassy lifeless eyes staring at you.
I feel almost certain that you would not remain sane for very long.
Also, I can't begin to tell you how disturbing this dream was while it
was actually happening to me! o_O
Coincidentally, I just saw somebody on a random web forum ask people
what they'd do if the human race suddenly vanished. Being a gaming
forum, most people claimed that they'd play computer games until the
power went down, and then comit suicide. Others suggested they would
collect as many guns as possible and find a large defensible building to
live in. Still others claimed that they would learn farming. Several
people wanted to visit Area 51 to see if they really have aliens there.
And some people said they would learn enough science to create new
lifeforms. (Er, right.)
Interestingly, several forum users appear to be female. (I know, it's
quite surprising really.) And most of them claimed they would find the
nearest sperm bank and "hope my birthing hips are adaquate to repopulate
the Earth". Man, that's one *hell* of a lot of work, right there! o_O
I rather suspect that no matter what your plans, in reality most typical
humans wouldn't last more than a year or two if the rest of humanity
vanished from around them. But hey...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/30/2011 10:50 AM, Invisible wrote:
>
> We do occasionally get ex-Java programmers turn up on the Haskell IRC
> channel who've read about Haskell, are really excited about it, and also
> have the attention span on a goldfish.
...?
> Required Bash quote: http://bash.org/?22094
It sucks that I can't see that at the moment.
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> We do occasionally get ex-Java programmers turn up on the Haskell IRC
>> channel who've read about Haskell, are really excited about it, and also
>> have the attention span on a goldfish.
>
> ...?
You know. People who are insanely excited about stuff, but don't have
enough attention span to actually, you know, LEARN ABOUT IT. They ask a
question, and half way through the answer ask another, unrelated
question, and before you finish answering that they start flipping out
about something else...
(Not, of course, that it's always ex-Java programmers...)
>> Required Bash quote: http://bash.org/?22094
>
> It sucks that I can't see that at the moment.
This is going to be such an anticlimax...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
