Conroy - Public Enemy #1 - Re: Turn your Rigol DS1052E Oscilloscope into a 100MHz DS1102E
in [Design]
|
From: krw on 8 Apr 2010 20:35 On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 00:55:53 +0200, "fritz" <yaputya(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > ><krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message >news:44msr5d5rdss6t3fdq3hsk8qlo58p3qmj8(a)4ax.com... >> On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 00:06:33 +0200, "fritz" <yaputya(a)microsoft.com> wrote: >> >>>"brent" <bulegoge(a)columbus.rr.com> wrote in message >>>news:eed0bfad-91dd-4d7a-82d9-dff8c0ca3226(a)r1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com... >>>On Apr 8, 5:07 pm, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I am totally opposed to censorship. >>> >>>> Censorship is a concept that is measured in degrees, not black and >>>>white. To summarize your position by stating that you are completely >>>>against it , demonstrates that you have not really given much thought >>>>to the topic. >>> >>>You are both ignorant AND stupid. >> >> Speaking of which, have you looked in a mirror lately, Mr. Pot? > >You are both ignorant AND stupid. >Probably a stupid Xtian to boot!! Ah, isn't the stupid little bigot cute. >>>Censorship IS black and white, my ignorant AND stupid friend. >>>I have given far more thought to the topic than you have, for many >>>years, you seem to be wet behind the ears, a young fool who has no >>>experience of what censorship really means. >> >> Ignorance personified. > >Read it AGAIN and weep, YOU ARE THE ignorant fool. DimBulb, that you? >>>You cannot allow ANY government to control the access to information. >>>To do so is to give up your rights, Australia may be going down the same >>>path that will result in Sharia Law if your ideas prevail. >>>The thin edge of the wedge. >> >> Really? You think everyone's personal information should be freely >> available? > >I thought you were just stupid, now I AM SURE YOU ARE AN IDIOT: >read AGAIN WHAT I HAVE POSTED AND YOUR STUPID RESPONSE: You said that all information should be freely available. Now you accuse me of being stupid because I pointed out *one* of thousands of reasons this is a *STUPID* idea. That's rich!
From: brent on 8 Apr 2010 20:37 On Apr 8, 8:35 pm, "k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: > On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 00:55:53 +0200, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > > ><k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message > >news:44msr5d5rdss6t3fdq3hsk8qlo58p3qmj8(a)4ax.com... > >> On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 00:06:33 +0200, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > > >>>"brent" <buleg...(a)columbus.rr.com> wrote in message > >>>news:eed0bfad-91dd-4d7a-82d9-dff8c0ca3226(a)r1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com.... > >>>On Apr 8, 5:07 pm, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > > >>>> I am totally opposed to censorship. > > >>>> Censorship is a concept that is measured in degrees, not black and > >>>>white. To summarize your position by stating that you are completely > >>>>against it , demonstrates that you have not really given much thought > >>>>to the topic. > > >>>You are both ignorant AND stupid. > > >> Speaking of which, have you looked in a mirror lately, Mr. Pot? > > >You are both ignorant AND stupid. > >Probably a stupid Xtian to boot!! > > Ah, isn't the stupid little bigot cute. > > >>>Censorship IS black and white, my ignorant AND stupid friend. > >>>I have given far more thought to the topic than you have, for many > >>>years, you seem to be wet behind the ears, a young fool who has no > >>>experience of what censorship really means. > > >> Ignorance personified. > > >Read it AGAIN and weep, YOU ARE THE ignorant fool. > > DimBulb, that you? > > >>>You cannot allow ANY government to control the access to information. > >>>To do so is to give up your rights, Australia may be going down the same > >>>path that will result in Sharia Law if your ideas prevail. > >>>The thin edge of the wedge. > > >> Really? You think everyone's personal information should be freely > >> available? > > >I thought you were just stupid, now I AM SURE YOU ARE AN IDIOT: > >read AGAIN WHAT I HAVE POSTED AND YOUR STUPID RESPONSE: > > You said that all information should be freely available. Now you accuse me > of being stupid because I pointed out *one* of thousands of reasons this is a > *STUPID* idea. That's rich! I am sorry to spoil your night, but those insults were directed towards me, not you.
From: brent on 8 Apr 2010 20:59 On Apr 8, 8:54 pm, "k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: > On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:37:32 -0700 (PDT), brent <buleg...(a)columbus.rr.com> > wrote: > > > > >On Apr 8, 8:35 pm, "k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> > >wrote: > >> On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 00:55:53 +0200, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > > >> ><k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message > >> >news:44msr5d5rdss6t3fdq3hsk8qlo58p3qmj8(a)4ax.com... > >> >> On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 00:06:33 +0200, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > > >> >>>"brent" <buleg...(a)columbus.rr.com> wrote in message > >> >>>news:eed0bfad-91dd-4d7a-82d9-dff8c0ca3226(a)r1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com... > >> >>>On Apr 8, 5:07 pm, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > > >> >>>> I am totally opposed to censorship. > > >> >>>> Censorship is a concept that is measured in degrees, not black and > >> >>>>white. To summarize your position by stating that you are completely > >> >>>>against it , demonstrates that you have not really given much thought > >> >>>>to the topic. > > >> >>>You are both ignorant AND stupid. > > >> >> Speaking of which, have you looked in a mirror lately, Mr. Pot? > > >> >You are both ignorant AND stupid. > >> >Probably a stupid Xtian to boot!! > > >> Ah, isn't the stupid little bigot cute. > > >> >>>Censorship IS black and white, my ignorant AND stupid friend. > >> >>>I have given far more thought to the topic than you have, for many > >> >>>years, you seem to be wet behind the ears, a young fool who has no > >> >>>experience of what censorship really means. > > >> >> Ignorance personified. > > >> >Read it AGAIN and weep, YOU ARE THE ignorant fool. > > >> DimBulb, that you? > > >> >>>You cannot allow ANY government to control the access to information. > >> >>>To do so is to give up your rights, Australia may be going down the same > >> >>>path that will result in Sharia Law if your ideas prevail. > >> >>>The thin edge of the wedge. > > >> >> Really? You think everyone's personal information should be freely > >> >> available? > > >> >I thought you were just stupid, now I AM SURE YOU ARE AN IDIOT: > >> >read AGAIN WHAT I HAVE POSTED AND YOUR STUPID RESPONSE: > > >> You said that all information should be freely available. Now you accuse me > >> of being stupid because I pointed out *one* of thousands of reasons this is a > >> *STUPID* idea. That's rich! > > >I am sorry to spoil your night, but those insults were directed > >towards me, not you. > > Perhaps he doesn't know how to read either (there's a lot of that going around > with the atheistic bigots lately), but he's answering my post (with my words > "answered"). You're welcome to the stupid bigot if it makes you feel better > though. ;-) the Bible proves itself to be truer to me every day. I never fully appreciated this bible verse until recently: "The fool has said in his heart there is no god" I have never seen so many intellectually dishonest people that cannot carry on a two sided conversation in my whole life.
From: brent on 8 Apr 2010 21:07 On Apr 8, 9:05 pm, "k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: > On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:59:10 -0700 (PDT), brent <buleg...(a)columbus.rr.com> > wrote: > > > > >On Apr 8, 8:54 pm, "k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> > >wrote: > >> On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:37:32 -0700 (PDT), brent <buleg...(a)columbus.rr.com> > >> wrote: > > >> >On Apr 8, 8:35 pm, "k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> > >> >wrote: > >> >> On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 00:55:53 +0200, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > > >> >> ><k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message > >> >> >news:44msr5d5rdss6t3fdq3hsk8qlo58p3qmj8(a)4ax.com... > >> >> >> On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 00:06:33 +0200, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > > >> >> >>>"brent" <buleg...(a)columbus.rr.com> wrote in message > >> >> >>>news:eed0bfad-91dd-4d7a-82d9-dff8c0ca3226(a)r1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com... > >> >> >>>On Apr 8, 5:07 pm, "fritz" <yapu...(a)microsoft.com> wrote: > > >> >> >>>> I am totally opposed to censorship. > > >> >> >>>> Censorship is a concept that is measured in degrees, not black and > >> >> >>>>white. To summarize your position by stating that you are completely > >> >> >>>>against it , demonstrates that you have not really given much thought > >> >> >>>>to the topic. > > >> >> >>>You are both ignorant AND stupid. > > >> >> >> Speaking of which, have you looked in a mirror lately, Mr. Pot? > > >> >> >You are both ignorant AND stupid. > >> >> >Probably a stupid Xtian to boot!! > > >> >> Ah, isn't the stupid little bigot cute. > > >> >> >>>Censorship IS black and white, my ignorant AND stupid friend. > >> >> >>>I have given far more thought to the topic than you have, for many > >> >> >>>years, you seem to be wet behind the ears, a young fool who has no > >> >> >>>experience of what censorship really means. > > >> >> >> Ignorance personified. > > >> >> >Read it AGAIN and weep, YOU ARE THE ignorant fool. > > >> >> DimBulb, that you? > > >> >> >>>You cannot allow ANY government to control the access to information. > >> >> >>>To do so is to give up your rights, Australia may be going down the same > >> >> >>>path that will result in Sharia Law if your ideas prevail. > >> >> >>>The thin edge of the wedge. > > >> >> >> Really? You think everyone's personal information should be freely > >> >> >> available? > > >> >> >I thought you were just stupid, now I AM SURE YOU ARE AN IDIOT: > >> >> >read AGAIN WHAT I HAVE POSTED AND YOUR STUPID RESPONSE: > > >> >> You said that all information should be freely available. Now you accuse me > >> >> of being stupid because I pointed out *one* of thousands of reasons this is a > >> >> *STUPID* idea. That's rich! > > >> >I am sorry to spoil your night, but those insults were directed > >> >towards me, not you. > > >> Perhaps he doesn't know how to read either (there's a lot of that going around > >> with the atheistic bigots lately), but he's answering my post (with my words > >> "answered"). You're welcome to the stupid bigot if it makes you feel better > >> though. ;-) > > > the Bible proves itself to be truer to me every day. I never fully > >appreciated this bible verse until recently: > > I'm happy for you. > > > "The fool has said in his heart there is no god" > > The bigger fool tries to take away another's god because he has none for > himself. > > >I have never seen so many intellectually dishonest people that cannot > >carry on a two sided conversation in my whole life. > > One needs to be able to listen (read) to carry on a two-way conversation. > Clearly that's not the case with "fritz" and ditz (from BC). I still cannot figure out if DC is that dense or if he is just really into trolling.
From: JosephKK on 9 Apr 2010 00:03
On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 16:13:04 GMT, David Segall <david(a)address.invalid> wrote: >"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 13:17:40 GMT, David Segall <david(a)address.invalid> wrote: >> >>>"David L. Jones" <altzone(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>Conroy is totally wrong. The Internet is an entirely different beast to >>>>products you buy on the shelf. >>>>The act of banning a book or video game for instance does not affect >>>>anything else in any other way the way filtering the Internet can. >>> >>>I note you used "can" not "does" in that sentence. The Internet filter >>>is a simple list of banned web sites that delays your download by a >>>few microseconds. In contrast, submitting a film or book to the >>>censors delays its release by days or even weeks. >>>> >>>>> Personally, I am against any censorship, >>> >>>I don't believe you. Would you really allow the screening of sadism or >>>bestiality in the 3:30pm to 6:00pm time slot on free to air TV? >> >>Not speaking for anyone else, but, yes, i would. It would never happen >>anyway. There is not enough market for it. > >Why did you feel the need to include two out of your three sentences >to reassure me that the programs _would_ be censored? No, i am talking about established track record. It was tried and got almost zero market share. OK, the second sentence needs the word "again" added after "happen". |