Favourite computer history books?
in [Mac Systems]
|
Prev: Scanning to a multipage pdf?
Next: Apple co-branding
From: Wes Groleau on 5 May 2010 18:49 On 05-05-2010 18:30, Michelle Steiner wrote: > Wes <Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote: > >>> ba + (na)^2 >> >> Standard Usenet nitpicking: >> Why is one syllable added and the others multiplied? > > Actually, it's raised to a power, not merely multiplied. Squared. Multiplied by itself. Whatever. Nothing like nit-picking the nit-picker. :-) Would the joke be better if it were phrased "Why is 'bana..' ba + na ... while '..nana' is na * na or (na)^2?" Answer, "No--yes--I don't KNOW!!!" -- Wes Groleau Pat's Polemics http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/barrett
From: Ian Gregory on 5 May 2010 18:54 On 2010-05-05, Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> wrote: > In article <hrsr4n$2t9$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > DRAMA QUEEN <Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote: > >> > ba + (na)^2 >> >> Standard Usenet nitpicking: >> Why is one syllable added and the others multiplied? > > Actually, it's raised to a power, not merely multiplied. It is multiplied by itself but it would be more consistent to multiply by 2. Using "+" to stand for concatenation in the first equality with its usual meaning in the second: banana = ba + na + na = ba + 2*na Whereas using "*" in an equivalent way: banana = ba*na*na = ba*(na)^2 So what is the square root of Christmas? Ian -- Ian Gregory http://www.zenatode.org.uk/
From: JF Mezei on 5 May 2010 19:18 Ian Gregory wrote: > So what is the square root of Christmas? That is easy: The square root of Christmas is January 18th 22:43:40 (Christmas is the 359th day of the year, square root of it is 18.94something, so 18th day of year is January 18th !)
From: Peter Flass on 5 May 2010 19:21 Warren Oates wrote: > In article <hrsp9s$fqh$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > Peter Flass <Peter_Flass(a)Yahoo.com> wrote: > >> I had a summer job in a factory like that for a couple of years. I >> believe it was electric and not steam, though I wouldn't swear to it, >> but all the machinery was driven by a series of belts. > > And did you sing "Tail Toddle"? ?????? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
From: Charlie Gibbs on 5 May 2010 21:07
In article <michelle-18D63E.15320105052010(a)62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi>, michelle(a)michelle.org (Michelle Steiner) writes: > In article <1356.812T488T8923605(a)kltpzyxm.invalid>, > "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs(a)kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > >> I just finished reading a story in the latest Analog where the >> protagonist is driving a car being chased by a flying saucer. As the >> saucer got close enough, its inertia-neutralizing field enveloped the >> car, so our hero hit the brakes and came to an instantaneous stop, >> causing the saucer to fly right past. What was even more fun was that >> he then fired at the saucer with a handgun; the bullet hit the saucer, >> which being inertialess was flicked off into the distance. > > *chuckle* I just may have to start reading SF magazines again. But > didn't the recoil send him and the car flying backwards when he fired > the gun? No, by the time he fired the saucer had gone far enough ahead that its field no longer enveloped the car. -- /~\ cgibbs(a)kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign! |