Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: unsettled on 3 Feb 2007 15:54 krw wrote: > In article <eq23j4$8qk_002(a)s939.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... > >>In article <gm08s2luj0mrj73m00vt7isc8sb4kvt630(a)4ax.com>, >> MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >> >>>On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:11:52 -0600, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> >>>Gave us: >>> >>> >>>>MassiveProng wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>On Fri, 02 Feb 07 14:04:45 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>In article <8e65s297p2fs3tfodc3mk1rmqu2phstukv(a)4ax.com>, >>>>>> MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>On Thu, 01 Feb 07 12:46:52 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It isn't the burners. It is the computer board in the stove that >>>>>>>>is bad. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The stove has a clock, a cooking timer, and maybe some thermal probe >>>>>>>monitoring ports. That isn't a computer. >>>>>> >>>>>>It has one board. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Which incorporates all the items I listed above. Being a single >>>>>board STILL does NOT make it a computer. >>>>> >>>>> Nice attempt at a sidestep, though. >>>> >>>>Your definitions are, to coin a phrase, unique. >>> >>> You're an idiot. I work in the industry. >>> >>> It would be termed a micro-controller, at best. >>> >>> STILL NOT a computer. >>> >>> >>>>"An electronic device for the storage and processing of information." >>> >>> A calculator would fit the definition. It isn't a computer either. >>>It IS a calculator. >>> >>> The controller in an oven is a micro-controller, nothing more. >>> >>> The consumer device has to have Windows CE or the like on it, and >>>have a user interface with a gui to BE a computer. >> >><spluttering emoticon wipes oatmeal off screen> > > > Come on BAH! Didn't the PDP-10 run Windows CE? > >>I thought you claimed to be in the computer manfuacturing biz? > > > Don't bother with Dimbulb (AKA FatBytestard, DarkMatter, and a > thousand other forgettable nyms). He's done and knows everything. > Any discussions are a waste of time. > > >>>Otherwise, it is >>>no more than fancy CONTROL hardware. >>> >>>You really have more people laughing at you than you realize. >> >>Riiight. > > > Well, there is one, evidently. > A good belly laugh is much different from the one reaction of hysteria we're witnessing. Of course, his definitions are unique.
From: Phil Carmody on 3 Feb 2007 15:55 "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> writes: > "Phil Carmody" <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > news:87irejdu1g.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org... > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: > >> In article <87ps8sgifg.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org>, > >> Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: > >> >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> >> >What nations do you think are "not dealing" with Iran? > >> >> > >> >> Bush has given Europe the job to deal with Iran's stubborness. > >> >> They are the ones who have been bitching that the US doesn't > >> >> know how to do this stuff. > >> > > >> >In what way was that supposed to be an answer to the question > >> >asked? > >> > > >> >I should probably expect as an answer to my enquiry something > >> >like "milky way!". > >> > >> In case you haven't noticed, the old "Free European" countries > >> now hide behind acting as a conglomerate when the task is > >> politically incorrect. > > > > Are you on mind-altering drugs? > > If the answer (if we ever get one) to this is "no" there is a good argument > for getting her some. I thought that sentence was going to be: If the answer (if we ever get one) to this is "no" there is a good reason why. Ooooh, ain't I catty! Phil -- "Home taping is killing big business profits. We left this side blank so you can help." -- Dead Kennedys, written upon the B-side of tapes of /In God We Trust, Inc./.
From: unsettled on 3 Feb 2007 15:56 MassiveProng wrote: > On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 19:31:13 -0000, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > > >>"Phil Carmody" <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >>news:87irejdu1g.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org... >> >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>> >>>>In article <87ps8sgifg.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org>, >>>> Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>>> >>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>>>> >>>>>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>What nations do you think are "not dealing" with Iran? >>>>>> >>>>>>Bush has given Europe the job to deal with Iran's stubborness. >>>>>>They are the ones who have been bitching that the US doesn't >>>>>>know how to do this stuff. >>>>> >>>>>In what way was that supposed to be an answer to the question >>>>>asked? >>>>> >>>>>I should probably expect as an answer to my enquiry something >>>>>like "milky way!". >>>> >>>>In case you haven't noticed, the old "Free European" countries >>>>now hide behind acting as a conglomerate when the task is >>>>politically incorrect. >>> >>>Are you on mind-altering drugs? >> >>If the answer (if we ever get one) to this is "no" there is a good argument >>for getting her some. >> > > Lithium! > > Shoes for industry! (Shoes for the dead) > > -firesign theater, Don't Crush That Dwarf, Hand Me The Pliers Ahh, a Howard Stern sycophant!
From: unsettled on 3 Feb 2007 16:00 Phil Carmody wrote: > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> writes: > >>"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>news:45C4E4E4.F06F7B1B(a)hotmail.com... >> >>> >>>T Wake wrote: >>> >>> >>>>I very much doubt BAH will respond to explain why she thinks rationing >>>>lasted for three decades after the war, which is a shame as it could be >>>>bloody entertaining. >>> >>>She's been on this tack before. >>> >>>ISTR she had the idea that Margaret Thatcher ended rationing. >> >>Ah. >> >>Amazing grasp on reality. > > > I missed that too. Had to search for it. > > Message-ID: <eii3t5$8nc_007(a)s792.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com> > <<< > >>There never have been any restrictions on what you can buy since rationing from >>WW2 ended in the 50s. > > > It didn't end in the UK. Thatcher was still removing vestiges of > WWII price and labor controls when she was PM. > > > On planet BAH, /rationing did not end in the UK/. > > Wow. Amazing _alternative_ reality she has a grasp on. > I know schizophrenics with a better grasp on real reality. > (As long as they keep taking their pills.) It's obvious that they're not working very well in your case.
From: T Wake on 3 Feb 2007 16:39
"Phil Carmody" <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:87ejp7c66t.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org... > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> writes: >> "Phil Carmody" <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:87irejdu1g.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org... >> > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >> >> In article <87ps8sgifg.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org>, >> >> Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >> >> >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >> >> >What nations do you think are "not dealing" with Iran? >> >> >> >> >> >> Bush has given Europe the job to deal with Iran's stubborness. >> >> >> They are the ones who have been bitching that the US doesn't >> >> >> know how to do this stuff. >> >> > >> >> >In what way was that supposed to be an answer to the question >> >> >asked? >> >> > >> >> >I should probably expect as an answer to my enquiry something >> >> >like "milky way!". >> >> >> >> In case you haven't noticed, the old "Free European" countries >> >> now hide behind acting as a conglomerate when the task is >> >> politically incorrect. >> > >> > Are you on mind-altering drugs? >> >> If the answer (if we ever get one) to this is "no" there is a good >> argument >> for getting her some. > > I thought that sentence was going to be: > > If the answer (if we ever get one) to this is "no" there is a good reason > why. > > Ooooh, ain't I catty! I'm kicking myself for missing that one. |