Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 8 Feb 2007 07:55 In article <915ms2pcj2d9uregv3dvmdcceq9nmfn5v1(a)4ax.com>, MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 03:16:55 +0000 (UTC), kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken >Smith) Gave us: > >>In article <0LKdnfp6w6j5-VrYnZ2dnUVZ8seinZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>T Wake <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:eq78ue$8qk_003(a)s1004.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> In article <eq56kc$h3d$6(a)blue.rahul.net>, >>>> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>>>In article <eq4ksf$8ss_009(a)s795.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>>>[......] >>>>>>Most of the code I wrote didn't do calculations. Most of OS >>>>>>code simply moves bits without error. >>>>> >>>>>Now that Windows is the most common OS, >>>> >>>> Except Windows isn't an OS. >>> >>>What is the OS on a windows XP machine then? What about a Windows Vista >>>machine? >> >>Vista is really a shell. > > All GUIs are, dipshit. > >> It contains a bunch of XP code. > > Yes, but it is incorporated into a completely new kernel write. > >> Whenever OS >>like stuff needs to be done, Vista passes the command to the XP code. > > You're an idiot. This ain't Windows 95 over DOS, dumbass. > >>Which then passes it down to some Win98 code that fires up DOS and runs >>the operation through QBasic. > > Bwuahahahahaha! > >> This is why Vista needs so much RAM. > > You're nuts! By your logic alone, "DOS" wouldn't know what to do >with it, so your bullshit doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Imagine that. > > You're an idiot. Vista was a full rewrite of the NT paradigm with >modern processor features expanded upon. Are you saying that NT was rewritten? Again, by whom. Rewriting NT from scratch would have taken 5-7 years, with the restriction of keeping the hardware constant. I would believe that they rewrote the interface between the OS once called NT and user mode programs. We used these things UUOs. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 8 Feb 2007 07:57 In article <eqcqfj$1co$3(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <eq9tv5$8ss_008(a)s807.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>In article <eq8rv7$v7q$6(a)blue.rahul.net>, >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >[.....] >>>Vista is really a shell. It contains a bunch of XP code. Whenever OS >>>like stuff needs to be done, Vista passes the command to the XP code. >>>Which then passes it down to some Win98 code that fires up DOS and runs >>>the operation through QBasic. This is why Vista needs so much RAM. >> >>So all they did is rinse, repeat previous releases? I expected >>this but I had my hopes up. ARe you sure that's what they did? > >Yes, it is quite well documented. At Microsoft "code reuse" is considered >a major goal. This is why all Microsoft applications bring up the BSOD >code. > > >>Do you know who did the work? > >Obviously Billy doesn't code anymore. A lot of the work was done in >India by the teenaged son of the person they thought they were hiring. That would have been just the TTY pictures. Not the OS guts. > In >this version many of the easter eggs come with a side of rice.
From: jmfbahciv on 8 Feb 2007 08:07 In article <OtidnQWNJOAtcVTYnZ2dnUVZ8qrinZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:eqcko9$8qk_002(a)s924.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <mMmdnXlTA4drSFXYnZ2dnUVZ8seinZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:eq9ts5$8ss_007(a)s807.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> In article <0LKdnfp6w6j5-VrYnZ2dnUVZ8seinZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>>news:eq78ue$8qk_003(a)s1004.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>>> In article <eq56kc$h3d$6(a)blue.rahul.net>, >>>>>> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>>>>>In article <eq4ksf$8ss_009(a)s795.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>>>>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>>>>>[......] >>>>>>>>Most of the code I wrote didn't do calculations. Most of OS >>>>>>>>code simply moves bits without error. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Now that Windows is the most common OS, >>>>>> >>>>>> Except Windows isn't an OS. >>>>> >>>>>What is the OS on a windows XP machine then? >>>> >>>> An OS that had an application's footprint shoved into its exec. >>> >>>In an OS which has had an applications footprint shoved into it's exec no >>>longer an OS? >> >> It is still an OS but its security abilities is completely compromised. >> Note that the application in my statement is the thingie called Windows. > >yes, but I am confused on terminology. With a Windows XP machine, what you >do call the OS? Microsoft chose to call it XP. I didn't do a den mother test on that one. NT lasted 5 minutes before it crashed on me. One of these days^Wmonths, I'll visit CompUSA and play with Vista and see how long it takes to crash the thing. /BAH
From: Tony Lance on 8 Feb 2007 11:20 Big Bertha Thing monorail Cosmic Ray Series Possible Real World System Constructs http://web.onetel.com/~tonylance/monorail.html Access page JPG 8K Image Astrophysics net ring access site Newsgroup Reviews including rec.aviation.student Drawing of model of track on the bottom monorail. Caption;- Model exhibited before the Royal Society, May 8, 1907. Extract from Chapter V;- 72. The gyroscope has been employed by Mr. Louis Brennan with striking ingenuity and success, to ensure the stability of a heavy car travelling on a single line of rail, with its centre of gravity above the level of the rail, as is seen in the accompanying illustrations.... A full description of the mechanism, with a mathematical discussion on the subject, is given by Mr. H. Cousins in the issue of Engineering for Nov. 21st, 1913, and following numbers. From the book An Elementary Treatment of the Theory of Spinning Tops and Gyroscopic Motion. By Harold Crabtree M.A. Formerly Scholar of Pembroke College, Cambridge Assistant Master at Charterhouse Longmans, Green and Co. 1923 First Edition 1909 Second Edition 1914 New Impression 1923 (C) Copyright Tony Lance 1998 Distribute complete and free of charge to comply. Big Bertha Thing francis To my brother-in-law Francis (RIP), who I once called "as daft as a brush." To his everlasting credit, he replied "I know." The greatest compliment, my wife ever paid me, was to say, that I did not hold a grudge. Net surfers do not hold grudges, but they are a bit short on victim support, whichever side the victim comes from. Tony Lance judemarie(a)bigberthathing.co.uk
From: Rich Grise on 8 Feb 2007 12:00
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 12:41:34 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote: > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>Ken Smith wrote: >>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>> >>> [... access to information ...] >>> >>>>A person can learn without access. >>> >>> No they can't. Without information input there is no learning. >> >>Another of those abbreviated sentence difficulties >>where what she wrote isn't the complete thought. > > My apologies. I'm trying to work on this lapse. I do keep > assuming that people remember what we've been talking about > two posts ago. >> >>We've been discussing access to written knowledge. > > yes. >> >>>> However, each person has >>>>to make the same mistakes. >> >>> If I hit my thumb with a hammer, I quickly recieve the information that it >>> is a bad idea. If there is no feedback from actions, you can't identify >>> mistakes. >> >>Picky picky. > > Not really. It's a good example. If there is no written warning > about hitting the thumb, then every body who picks a hammer > will have to learn the same lesson by experience. This takes time-- > lots of time--w.r.t. technology, manufacturing and science. > That's why we spend almost 20 years as children. It's their job to learn everything they can, to become useful adults. Cheers! Rich |