Integer factorization, etc.
in [Math]
|
From: S.C.Sprong on 12 Apr 2008 06:02 [note follow-up to sci.math and sci.crypt only] In rec.puzzles Marshall <marshall.spight(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Every time I have ever seen the phrase "not suffer fools gladly," it has >been an apologist acknowledgment of a respected person's bad behavior. >It's a code phrase used to describe high status jerks. And every time I have ever seen someone who is obviously highly competent being belittled as mere 'having high status', and their growing impatience with someone who is impervious to reasoning being twisted as 'jerklike behavior', it has been invariably a cop-out for the insecure integrity-free to avoid having to admit they have made a mistake. Facts: - Lankinen crossposted to wildly off-topic newsgroups. - Lankinen's knowledge of integer factorisation is at about the level of first year, second year university discrete math. He needs quite a bit more before he is proposing new theories and algorithms on number theory. - Lankinen shows a very high resistance to corrections, the primary sign of a luser and a crank. Question: - What is the use of indiscriminately praising Lankinen and thus encouraging him to waste more time? The longer this goes on the more painful his fall will be. You call that friendly? I call that heartless and evil. scs
From: David Bernier on 12 Apr 2008 06:07 Marshall wrote: > On Apr 11, 6:49 pm, Tim Smith<reply_in_gr...(a)mouse-potato.com> wrote: >>> [...] has a record of not suffering fools easily. [....] >> None of the above, though, is inconsistent with being a jerk. > > Every time I have ever seen the phrase "not suffer fools gladly," > it has been an apologist acknowledgment of a respected person's > bad behavior. It's a code phrase used to describe high > status jerks. I think it's always used by someone referring to another person's way of dealing with "fools". I would think that there's generally an implied context, such as " when the topic is algorithms used in number theory" . How often is it said on TV? David Bernier
From: Marshall on 12 Apr 2008 11:05 On Apr 12, 3:02 am, "S.C.Sprong" <scspr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > [note follow-up to sci.math and sci.crypt only] > In rec.puzzles Marshall <marshall.spi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >Every time I have ever seen the phrase "not suffer fools gladly," it has > >been an apologist acknowledgment of a respected person's bad behavior. > >It's a code phrase used to describe high status jerks. > > And every time I have ever seen someone who is obviously > highly competent being belittled as mere 'having high status', You misread me. I have no opinions on this thread, and I am expressing no opinions on Pubkeybreaker. My comment was generic, so your leap from "high status" to "belittling" is unjustified. (And quite a stretch no matter the context.) I could just as well said: It's a code phrase used to describe obviously highly competent jerks. Which it is. Marshall
From: quasi on 12 Apr 2008 15:23 On 12 Apr 2008 10:02:01 GMT, "S.C.Sprong" <scsprong(a)gmail.com> wrote: >- Lankinen's knowledge of integer factorisation is at about the level of > first year, second year university discrete math. He needs quite a bit > more before he is proposing new theories and algorithms on number theory. Nonsense. quasi
From: fortune.bruce on 12 Apr 2008 15:11
On Apr 12, 3:02 am, "S.C.Sprong" <scspr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > [note follow-up to sci.math and sci.crypt only] > In rec.puzzles Marshall <marshall.spi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >Every time I have ever seen the phrase "not suffer fools gladly," it has > >been an apologist acknowledgment of a respected person's bad behavior. > >It's a code phrase used to describe high status jerks. > > And every time I have ever seen someone who is obviously highly competent > being belittled as mere 'having high status', and their growing impatience > with someone who is impervious to reasoning being twisted as 'jerklike > behavior', it has been invariably a cop-out for the insecure integrity-free > to avoid having to admit they have made a mistake. > > Facts: > - Lankinen crossposted to wildly off-topic newsgroups. > - Lankinen's knowledge of integer factorisation is at about the level of > first year, second year university discrete math. He needs quite a bit > more before he is proposing new theories and algorithms on number theory. > - Lankinen shows a very high resistance to corrections, the primary sign of > a luser and a crank. > > Question: > - What is the use of indiscriminately praising Lankinen and thus encouraging > him to waste more time? The longer this goes on the more painful his fall > will be. You call that friendly? I call that heartless and evil. > > scs That was very well said. And I love the term integrity-free, so fitting in this case. Thank you, S.C.Sprong. Bruce |