From: Mark Conrad on

Can submarines swim?

I am serious, am from the colonies, y'know,
so trying to get ed-u-cated.

MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
on this side of the pond created an artificial
fish (submarine) - tail and all.

It waggled its tail sidewise to swim, confusing
the heck out of regular fish, who did not know
whether to allow it to join a regular fish school,
or not.

It swam under obstructions that regular submarines
had never swum under before.

Please help, we rely on you brits to keep us ed-e-cated.

Mark-

--
I like to go swimmin' with bow legged wimmin'
and swim between their legs - - - tra la la
From: Pd on
Mark Conrad <aeiou(a)mostly.invalid> wrote:

> Can submarines swim?

Depends whether machines can think.

--
Pd
From: Elliott Roper on
In article <1jkti39.ml3kiy1y37empN%peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid>, Pd
<peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid> wrote:

> Mark Conrad <aeiou(a)mostly.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Can submarines swim?
>
> Depends whether machines can think.

....and then whether they can think they can swim.

--
To de-mung my e-mail address:- fsnospam$elliott$$
PGP Fingerprint: 1A96 3CF7 637F 896B C810 E199 7E5C A9E4 8E59 E248
From: Mark Conrad on
In article <290620100035571156%nospam(a)yrl.co.uk>, Elliott Roper
<nospam(a)yrl.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <1jkti39.ml3kiy1y37empN%peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid>, Pd
> <peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Mark Conrad <aeiou(a)mostly.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > Can submarines swim?
> >
> > Depends whether machines can think.
>
> ...and then whether they can think they can swim.

Poor misguided machines, some of them actually have
the audacity to presume they will someday be our equals.

All us superior humans know this will never happen, right?

Somebody say "right", because my Mac is glaring at me,
the poor thing thinks it is way past being my "equal",
it thinks it is my better.

Mark-

--
What other thinking entity could throw a saddle
on this great prose?

Mr. See owned a saw, and Mr. Soar owned a seesaw. Now, See's
saw sawed Soar's seesaw before Soar saw See, which made Soar
sore. Had Soar seen See's saw before See sawed Soar's seesaw,
See's saw would not have sawed Soar's seesaw. So See's saw
sawed Soar's seesaw. But it was sad to see Soar so sore just
because See's saw sawed Soar's seesaw.


So there, too; let my Mac come up with something like that. ;-)
From: Justin C on
On 2010-06-29, Mark Conrad <aeiou(a)mostly.invalid> wrote:
>
> Poor misguided machines, some of them actually have
> the audacity to presume they will someday be our equals.
>
> All us superior humans know this will never happen, right?
>
> Somebody say "right", because my Mac is glaring at me,
> the poor thing thinks it is way past being my "equal",
> it thinks it is my better.
>
> Mark-

Ha! You have failed the Turing test! I declare that *you* are a chamine
trying to fool us!

You have to get up pretty damn early to sneak one past me! <gloat>

Justin.

--
Justin C, by the sea.