Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Rich Grise on 19 Feb 2007 20:50 On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 23:01:11 +0000, Ken Smith wrote: > nonsense(a)unsettled.com <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: >>Ken Smith wrote: >>> nonsense(a)unsettled.com <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: >>>>d.086(a)hotmail.com wrote: >>>> >>>>>Could you please terminate this thread. It's off topic and crossposted >>>>>to sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.electronics.design, sci.med The >>>>>discussion below is only about electronics design. Please start a new >>>>>thread in your own news group and give it a Subject heading >>>>>appropriate to the topic under discussion. Please no more 'Jihad needs >>>>>scientists'. It's offensive. >>>> >>>>That's nice. >>> >>> By posting that you did exactly the thing he was asking you not to do. I >>> really don't see why you did it after all he should get his way about what >>> happens on the usenet shouldn't he? >> >>Oh gee, did I do something wrong? > > Yes, you should be ashamed of your self for continuing to post into this > thread when you were asked by that very important person not to. Such > people need to have their every whim catered too. If not they may may pout > and that would be very bad, I think you would agree. > My newsreader has an "Ignore thread" menu option, but apparently it goes by actual threading, and not subject line. Good-Bye. Rich
From: nonsense on 19 Feb 2007 22:13 Rich Grise wrote: > On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 23:01:11 +0000, Ken Smith wrote: > >>nonsense(a)unsettled.com <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: >> >>>Ken Smith wrote: >>> >>>>nonsense(a)unsettled.com <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>d.086(a)hotmail.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Could you please terminate this thread. It's off topic and crossposted >>>>>>to sci.physics, sci.chem, sci.electronics.design, sci.med The >>>>>>discussion below is only about electronics design. Please start a new >>>>>>thread in your own news group and give it a Subject heading >>>>>>appropriate to the topic under discussion. Please no more 'Jihad needs >>>>>>scientists'. It's offensive. >>>>> >>>>>That's nice. >>>> >>>>By posting that you did exactly the thing he was asking you not to do. I >>>>really don't see why you did it after all he should get his way about what >>>>happens on the usenet shouldn't he? >>> >>>Oh gee, did I do something wrong? >> >>Yes, you should be ashamed of your self for continuing to post into this >>thread when you were asked by that very important person not to. Such >>people need to have their every whim catered too. If not they may may pout >>and that would be very bad, I think you would agree. >> > > My newsreader has an "Ignore thread" menu option, but apparently it goes > by actual threading, and not subject line. > > Good-Bye. > Rich It seems the pouters are circling. I think I need more time to contemplate what you're promoting here, Ken. This is such a serious issue I don't want any possibility of getting it wrong.
From: The Ghost In The Machine on 19 Feb 2007 20:46 In sci.physics, nonsense(a)unsettled.com <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote on Mon, 19 Feb 2007 18:08:13 -0600 <2f9c$45da3bec$4fe7510$24369(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>: > The Ghost In The Machine wrote: > >> In sci.physics, Ken Smith >> <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> >> wrote >> on Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:01:38 +0000 (UTC) >> <ercs6i$dg2$3(a)blue.rahul.net>: >> >>>In article <45D9BDD4.B68B994E(a)hotmail.com>, >>>Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> The Ghost In The Machine <ewill(a)sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhd2lnCTWQM >>>>>> >>>>>>skipped horribly on initial load, but that looks to be >>>>>>more of a bandwidth problem than a CPU one. CPU utilization was >>>>>>slightly lower. >>>>>> >>>>>>SFW. Its main themes are apparently music, a school >>>>>>bus, and dancing. Replay was possible without skipping. >>>>>>Full screen utilized almost 90% of CPU, so that might be >>>>>>an issue. >>>>>> >>>>>>FWIW. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>If this becomes a common usage, it sounds like a dedicated >>>>>processor will be installed. >>>> >>>>It's called the CPU. >>> >>>It could also be "a CPU". Multiprocessor systems may start to happen >>>soon. >> >> >> Multiprocessor systems have been around for awhile. >> My Kayak XM600 is dual-processor-capable -- this back when >> 833 MHZ Pentiums were the norm. > > I had a dual processor motherboard sporting 200 mHz CPUs > on it. NT could make proper use of them, as could Linux, > but the ordinary Doze operating systems like 95 and 98 > ignored and wasted the second CPU. Very true. Of course, one generally needs an OS to do anything with a *single* CPU device anyway. :-) This OS is usually bundled with the device in such applications as mobile phones and PDAs. In times of yore Unix boxes were also bundled with the appropriate and proprietary variant of Unix for that box. Linux of course is a relatively recent (1991+) phenomenon. There are a few possible exceptions -- e.g., in very old equipment, and in stuff such as the Harris 1802, which could allow the user to toggle in programs directly into memory using DMA and a simple debounced switch arrangement. Of course the 1802 has a clock rate of maybe 10 MHz, which ain't exactly speedy compared to today's AMD or Intel micros. > >> Even a single-CPU system has a secondary GPU if one has a >> good graphics card. > > -- #191, ewill3(a)earthlink.net Error 16: Not enough space on file system to delete file(s) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: T Wake on 20 Feb 2007 05:05 <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote in message news:406fb$45da4ef5$cdd08470$24775(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >T Wake wrote: >> <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote in message >> news:70930$45da3abe$4fe7510$24349(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... > > > > >>>Next, BAH wrote a conditional statement: > >>>"This is not a new concept; it's been around since >>>females had to cook, rear kids, and entertain >>>the males so they would stick around for a while." > >>>It rather sounds to me as though she's dumping on >>>men, that they won't hang around unless the woman >>>performs in certain ways. Hardly misogynist. > >> I never said BAH was the misogynist, however she is still implying women >> have no choice. In reality they can not cook, not rear kids and not >> entertain males. Some cultures may make things look different but as long >> as we accept free will, the choice is there. > > How do you keep missing the limiting clause in BAH's > statement? I didnt miss it at all. > "...so they would stick around for a while." > > In fact it is the operative part of her statement. > > This is a problem in the straightforward parsing of > a sentence. The concept isn't complicated. I know.
From: jmfbahciv on 20 Feb 2007 06:41
In article <45D9BDD4.B68B994E(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> The Ghost In The Machine <ewill(a)sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote: >> > >> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhd2lnCTWQM >> > >> >skipped horribly on initial load, but that looks to be >> >more of a bandwidth problem than a CPU one. CPU utilization was >> >slightly lower. >> > >> >SFW. Its main themes are apparently music, a school >> >bus, and dancing. Replay was possible without skipping. >> >Full screen utilized almost 90% of CPU, so that might be >> >an issue. >> > >> >FWIW. >> > >> If this becomes a common usage, it sounds like a dedicated >> processor will be installed. > >It's called the CPU. The C in CPU is central. This doesn't mean specialized. /BAH |