Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Martin Brown on 15 Mar 2007 12:39 On Mar 14, 11:50 am, jmfbah...(a)aol.com wrote: > In article <1173870480.508596.143...(a)n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > "Martin Brown" <|||newspam...(a)nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > >On Mar 13, 10:34 am, jmfbah...(a)aol.com wrote: > >> This is the point. It will never be "correct" because the file > >> contains a checksummed listing of itself. > > >> <snip> > > >> Do the exercise. Then you will see what I'm talking about. > > >You really are determined to parade your ignorance. File checksums are > >trivial to make internally consistent. > > >At the simplest conceptual level you could define all files to have > >checksum=0 and add some fluff to the end of each one to make it so. In > >this case you only need to adjust theTAPE.DIRand since you know the > >effect of changing the bytes in the checksum representation on the > >checksum it is relatively easy to program a self consistent solution. > >then self consistent solutions can be found by SMOP. > > It isn't a goal to have the checksum ofTAPE.DIRcorrect. It was > a mandatory goal to have a directory of the tape on the tape. The > tradeoff to accomplish this goal was to have the checksum of > the fileTAPE.DIRnot match the checksum ofTAPE.DIRreported > inTAPE.DIR. You could so easily have done both if you had just an ounce of understanding. > > Query: Is the ability to think about this concept (Mr. unsettled > called itrecursion) a rare ability? Hells bells! Clearly you cannot!!! You claim to have been in the business and yet haven't heard of recursion. Unhinged is wrong though - the problem is only self referential. There is at worst a simple tail recursion that can be easily unwound. But since you cannot cope with this very basic concept here is a concrete example. (*) The decimal checksum of this ASCII sentence is exactly 05407 fuBAH, Unhinged and MassivelyWrong might like to check this assertion- the text of the sentence starts with "(" and ends with "7" It is the sort of elegant toy puzzle that Martin Gardner would delight in. CRC16 would take a lot more effort. Regards, Martin Brown
From: krw on 15 Mar 2007 12:42 In article <874pomikjk.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org>, thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk says... > krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> writes: > > In article <3j0hv21dmsbm446in4auk2106k1m71rvqk(a)4ax.com>, > > MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org says... > > > On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 15:12:12 -0400, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> Gave us: > > > > > > >> > > > >Don't want no steenkin' Apples, now that they're x86. (Disclosure: I > > > >worked on the later G4 and G5 processors ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > That would be "worked with" Not "on", dipshit. > > > > MassivelyWrong once again, Dimbulb. I was a member of the Apple CPU > > development team (Nintendo PPC750 processor variants as well) until > > Apple switched to x86. > > Hmmm, why were Apple buying G4s from us at Freescale if they > made their own? Apple made none, idiot. -- Keith
From: nonsense on 15 Mar 2007 14:46 krw wrote: > In article <874pomikjk.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org>, > thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk says... > >>krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> writes: >> >>>In article <3j0hv21dmsbm446in4auk2106k1m71rvqk(a)4ax.com>, >>>MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org says... >>> >>>>On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 15:12:12 -0400, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> Gave us: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Don't want no steenkin' Apples, now that they're x86. (Disclosure: I >>>>>worked on the later G4 and G5 processors ;-) >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> That would be "worked with" Not "on", dipshit. >>> >>>MassivelyWrong once again, Dimbulb. I was a member of the Apple CPU >>>development team (Nintendo PPC750 processor variants as well) until >>>Apple switched to x86. >> >>Hmmm, why were Apple buying G4s from us at Freescale if they >>made their own? > > > Apple made none, idiot. > Henry Ford overextended himself creating a rubber plantation so he could make his own tires more cheaply. "Do what you're good at."
From: MassiveProng on 15 Mar 2007 18:41 On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 11:04:44 -0400, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> Gave us: > >MassivelyWrong once again, Dimbulb. I was a member of the Apple CPU >development team (Nintendo PPC750 processor variants as well) until >Apple switched to x86. Neither of which is the G4 or G5. Try again, lying asswipe. Good to know that ther root of your stupidity is the fact that you are a MacTard too. I knew there was something stupid about your from the start, and that is a great part of it.
From: MassiveProng on 15 Mar 2007 18:50
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 12:42:19 -0400, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> Gave us: >In article <874pomikjk.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org>, >thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk says... >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> writes: >> > In article <3j0hv21dmsbm446in4auk2106k1m71rvqk(a)4ax.com>, >> > MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org says... >> > > On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 15:12:12 -0400, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> Gave us: >> > > >> > > >> >> > > >Don't want no steenkin' Apples, now that they're x86. (Disclosure: I >> > > >worked on the later G4 and G5 processors ;-) >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > That would be "worked with" Not "on", dipshit. >> > >> > MassivelyWrong once again, Dimbulb. I was a member of the Apple CPU >> > development team (Nintendo PPC750 processor variants as well) until >> > Apple switched to x86. >> >> Hmmm, why were Apple buying G4s from us at Freescale if they >> made their own? > >Apple made none, idiot. Bwuahahahahah! The wuss jumps on me for calling people names, then does it himself. You are worse than a hypocrite. You are a Stupifucktardocrite. |