Towards avoiding paradoxes with set theory: Corrected.
in [Logic]
|
Prev: Hemant Pandey from India Solves P vs. NP
Next: "A" defining Finite Number for High School students #257; 2nd ed; Correcting Math
From: Charlie-Boo on 4 Nov 2009 19:58 On Nov 4, 11:29 am, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote: > Charlie-Boo <shymath...(a)gmail.com> writes: > > People have been calling it that for years. Why would someone spell > > out the sub-title and why would us die-hard MUMPS programmers say "The > > MUMPS Book ..." when talking about MUMPS? They call it "Charlie's > > Book" or "The Advanced MUMPS Text" or Handbook of Efficiency > > Techniques or HOET. > > You know, it's funny. I searched the web for "Handbook of Efficiency > Techniques". Doesn't take long. Just 16 hits. Every hit used the > word MUMPS in the title, aside from your posts here and another post > you made athttp://objectmix.com. > > > See my earlier references to quotes from fans who surround me at > > computer conferences. > > Somehow, your reports of how well-loved you are don't seem all that > persuasive to me. Here's the only Usenet review of the book I've > found. > > Beyond there being a _reason_ for it being the "last known copy", > note that _tHoMET_ is from the early-early 1980s (late 1970s?) and > was out of date/inaccurate within months of it being published. > Such efficiency techniques of 'use one letter variable names because > they are special-cased for faster lookups' may have been true for > some early versions of MUMPS, but by 1982 I know _explicitly_ that > neither of the then-modern versions of MUMPS that "technique" was > directed act did that any more. > > However, having a PDF version might be fun for a laugh now and then. > > (From a 2003 thread found athttp://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.mumps/browse_frm/thread/1abd..."handbook+of+efficiency+techniques"#fe9469092540af20) > > To be fair, other posters in the thread do not have a negative opinion > of the text. They have no opinion at all, because they have either > never seen it or forgotten it entirely. How do you know they have never seen it or forgotten about it entirely? That is a false conclusion. There is exactly one indication of someone not being familiar with it, from Mary Rose. All 3 are enthusiastic about it: Rob Tweed: Why not make it available to even more cyberfriends, Charlie, by uploading it to our Utility Library - see www.mgateway.com John K Mitchell : Let us put it on the camta.net site ;-) Mary Rose Hoare: A handbook of efficiency techniques certainly sounds interesting. How would I get a copy? If even one of Charlie's techniques turned out to be useful or just gave me a new idea it could save a lot. Then there are two quotations cited: "Charlie's book is still the best source for efficiency techniques in MUMPS." - Fred Hiltz "It's well-known that (Charlie's book) is a standard resource for MUMPS programmers." - Karl at Lovelace It's exactly what I said - only Ben was negative - and see how badly he attacks it? It is a personal thing with him. When I ask for examples of implementation-specific material beyond the 5 out of 125 techniques in the appendix, he has none. He has no technical points. Yet he repeats it. Now, who does that sound like? (Hint: SCI.LOGIC.) Only one person has that attitude in this discussion. You are not being honest. C-B > On the other hand, there is a single, anonymous Amazon.com review. > That review is positively glowing. Anonymous netizens seem to love > you. Also, the MUMPS FAQ is also approving of the book, and says, "If > you need to finetune an existing application or create a new one, this > book's for you!" Let's call the online reaction mixed. > > > How many books have you written or autographs have you given? Are > > you just jealous? I spent 2 years writing that book and the nice > > programmers at hospitals are almost unanimous in their praise, while > > the psychotic professors and their students are not about to give > > anyone outside of their species anything. > > I've written no books and I don't claim to be a better or more > influential author than you. > > -- > Jesse F. Hughes > > "There's absolutely no information here." > -- Hank Hill, on blogging and information theory.
From: Charlie-Boo on 4 Nov 2009 20:08 On Nov 4, 2:37 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote: > Charlie-Boo <shymath...(a)gmail.com> writes: > > On Nov 4, 1:17 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote: > >> Charlie-Boo <shymath...(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> > On Nov 4, 11:29 am, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote: > >> >> Charlie-Boo <shymath...(a)gmail.com> writes: > >> >> > People have been calling it that for years. Why would someone spell > >> >> > out the sub-title and why would us die-hard MUMPS programmers say "The > >> >> > MUMPS Book ..." when talking about MUMPS? They call it "Charlie's > >> >> > Book" or "The Advanced MUMPS Text" or ``Handbook of Efficiency > >> >> > Techniques" or ``HOET". > > >> >> You know, it's funny. I searched the web for "Handbook of Efficiency > >> >> Techniques". Doesn't take long. Just 16 hits. Every hit used the > >> >> word MUMPS in the title, aside from your posts here and another post > >> >> you made athttp://objectmix.com. > > >> > The others are book dealers who are using its full name, of course, > >> > which proves my point: when used in discussions people use the > >> > abbreviated name - just as they refer to Wolfram's book as ANKS. > > >> Just to be clear: a google search on > > >> "HOET" mumps programming -virus -disease -rubella > > >> brings up five hits. The only relevant hit is your post in this > >> thread. > > >> Substituting "computer" for "programming" does no better. Nor does > >> "efficiency" or "techniques". > > >> It seems your fan base doesn't use the internet. > > > Search MUMPS HANDBOOK and there's millions. > > Er, right. But that's exactly what I said was odd about your > reference: you left out the word "MUMPS". That is the same phrase used to describe my book by both myself and Mary Rose in the thread you quote: "Handbook of Efficiency Techniques". Why is it suddenly odd? You have taken attacking the messenger (ad hominem) to an art form. How about if we start talking about Mathematical Logic? Just a little? :) C-B > (And, in any case, not all > of the hits are reference to your book.) > > Anyway, this discussion has gotten a bit silly. I never said that > your book isn't influential among the MUMPS community. I honestly > have no idea of its influence. I only said that you inflated the > apparent scope of the book by referring to it as "the Handbook of > Efficiency Techniques" -- and also that it's pretty silly to call it > your first book when it is your only published book. > > > > > Post it on any MUMPS discussion board - or on all of at least 3 or 4. > > Ask if anyone has heard of or read my book and what their opinion of > > it is. > > Well, the 2003 thread I mentioned provides some small anecdotal > evidence, no? One bad review and the remainder of posters had no > familiarity with the text. (There is one positive anonymous review > on Amazon and one complimentary mention in the MUMPS FAQ, so I'm not > suggesting that the general reception is negative.) > > > Sorry - you're a waste of space. > > Surely. > > -- > Jesse F. Hughes > "Casting [Demi] Moore as a woman who has come to the New World so that > she can 'worship without fear or persecution' in _The_Scarlet_Letter_ > is like casting Bruce Willis as Young Rene Descartes." -Joe Queenan- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: Jesse F. Hughes on 4 Nov 2009 21:03 Charlie-Boo <shymathguy(a)gmail.com> writes: > On Nov 4, 11:29 am, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote: >> Charlie-Boo <shymath...(a)gmail.com> writes: >> > People have been calling it that for years. Why would someone spell >> > out the sub-title and why would us die-hard MUMPS programmers say "The >> > MUMPS Book ..." when talking about MUMPS? They call it "Charlie's >> > Book" or "The Advanced MUMPS Text" or ``Handbook of Efficiency >> > Techniques" or ``HOET". >> >> You know, it's funny. I searched the web for "Handbook of Efficiency >> Techniques". Doesn't take long. Just 16 hits. Every hit used the >> word MUMPS in the title, aside from your posts here and another post >> you made athttp://objectmix.com. >> >> > See my earlier references to quotes from fans who surround me at >> > computer conferences. >> >> Somehow, your reports of how well-loved you are don't seem all that >> persuasive to me. Here's the only Usenet review of the book I've >> found. >> >> Beyond there being a _reason_ for it being the "last known copy", >> note that _tHoMET_ is from the early-early 1980s (late 1970s?) and >> was out of date/inaccurate within months of it being published. >> Such efficiency techniques of 'use one letter variable names because >> they are special-cased for faster lookups' may have been true for >> some early versions of MUMPS, but by 1982 I know _explicitly_ that >> neither of the then-modern versions of MUMPS that "technique" was >> directed act did that any more. >> >> However, having a PDF version might be fun for a laugh now and then. >> >> (From a 2003 thread found athttp://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.mumps/browse_frm/thread/1abd..."handbook+of+efficiency+techniques"#fe9469092540af20) >> >> To be fair, other posters in the thread do not have a negative opinion >> of the text. They have no opinion at all, because they have either >> never seen it or forgotten it entirely. > > How do you know they have never seen it or forgotten about it > entirely? That is a false conclusion. I agree. On re-reading the posts, I'm not sure how I came away with that impression. Nothing Rob or John writes indicates that they're unfamiliar with the book. > > There is exactly one indication of someone not being familiar with it, > from Mary Rose. All 3 are enthusiastic about it: > > Rob Tweed: ``Why not make it available to even more cyberfriends, > Charlie, by uploading it to our Utility Library - see www.mgateway.com" > > John K Mitchell : ``Let us put it on the camta.net site ;-)" > > Mary Rose Hoare: ``A handbook of efficiency techniques certainly > sounds interesting. How would I get a copy? If even one of Charlie's > techniques turned out to be useful or just gave me a new idea it could > save a lot." > > Then there are two quotations cited: > > "Charlie's book is still the best source for efficiency techniques in > MUMPS." > - Fred Hiltz > > "It's well-known that (Charlie's book) is a standard resource for > MUMPS programmers." > - Karl at Lovelace Yes, to be honest, I hadn't noticed these quotations. As it turns out, you *did* claim that these folks said the above in that thread, but I wasn't really reading your posts. I was reading others. -- God made the bees And the bees make honey. The miller's man does all the work, But the miller makes the money. --- Mother Goose
From: Marshall on 4 Nov 2009 23:39 On Nov 4, 6:37 am, Charlie-Boo <shymath...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Your comment about a bone through the nose was meant to be a > > disparaging comment. > > You are insulting African Americans. Why is it disparaging to refer > to their customs? African Americans do not have a custom of putting bones through their noses. Marshall
From: Marshall on 4 Nov 2009 23:43
On Nov 3, 10:38 pm, Charlie-Boo <shymath...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 3, 1:30 am, Marshall <marshall.spi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Nov 2, 7:30 am, Charlie-Boo <shymath...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Low? What is low about African culture? > > > > > >http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://farm3.static.flickr.com... > > > > > Unfortunately for your argument Papua New Guinea is not in Africa. > > > > That's where the picture was taken, but that doesn't say the guy isn't > > > from Africa. > > > The caption says "Highlands man ..." referring to the highlands > > of Papua New Guinea. But perhaps he lived in Africa in a previous > > life. > > OMG He's arguing about whether a guy's from Africa or not. > [...] > 3. The guy isn't from Africa. So why do you keep trying to suggest that he is? Marshall |