more EE Times nonsense
in [Design]
|
From: krw on 27 Apr 2010 18:57 On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:54:47 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 05:16:41 -0700, Archimedes' Lever ><OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: > >>On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 05:02:42 -0700, John Larkin >><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>As long as human personality is what it is, and lacking active damping >>>mechanisms, we will continue to have destructive bubbles. >> >> >> Fits your stupidity to a tee. > >Read the books. You do read books? Haven't you noticed that DimBulb is illiterate, as well as being innumerate?
From: John Larkin on 27 Apr 2010 18:59 On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 17:57:22 -0500, "krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:54:47 -0700, John Larkin ><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 05:16:41 -0700, Archimedes' Lever >><OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: >> >>>On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 05:02:42 -0700, John Larkin >>><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>>As long as human personality is what it is, and lacking active damping >>>>mechanisms, we will continue to have destructive bubbles. >>> >>> >>> Fits your stupidity to a tee. >> >>Read the books. You do read books? > >Haven't you noticed that DimBulb is illiterate, as well as being innumerate? Actually, yes. John
From: John Fields on 27 Apr 2010 23:48 On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 02:09:57 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >On Apr 24, 10:51�pm, John Fields <jfie...(a)austininstruments.com> >wrote:> .. .. .. >> When dealing with the likes of you however, your chagrin at being found >> in error is so great that in order to try to get away you're forced to >> traverse that tangled web of insult and obfuscation you've been weaving >> for so long that it takes a great deal of verbiage, all of it relevant, >> in order to corner you. > >A claim that founders on the fact that I do post mistakes from time to >time - nowhere near as often as you'd like to think - and when someone >points this out I post an apology and thank them for the correction. > >The most recent example was the fifth post in the thread "Very low >frequency 100 microvolt/sec triangle ramp with adjustable limits and >slope" on the 29th January 2010. --- It's there, of course, but the only reason you responded in the way you did was because there was nowhere else for you to go. --- >The next post in the thread was a >comment from you expressing surprise, which you do seem to have >forgotten. --- True. I don't keep an indexed file of your posts and my replies to them handy but, since your admitting to error is so rare, perhaps I should have forwarded a copy of your concession to Ripley's "Believe It Or Not!" --- >This makes your comment a mistake, for which you need to apologise. --- Hardly. My comment was about the effort required to corner you if you were allowed to traverse your web. In this instance you weren't, and you were forced to capitulate, so my comment still stands. --- >> >> A sidestep on your part in an attempt to avoid the truth. >> >> >What "truth"? >> >> --- >> The truth that you'll go to great lengths in order to keep from having >> to admit that you were wrong. > >Which happens to be a lie - see above. --- Nothing above proves that it's a lie, since it only addresses your admission of error in a single instance. --- ><snipped the remaining - equally deluded - comment> --- Don't address it, just insult it vociferously and pray that it'll go away? Typical Slomanesque. But, in another vein... I don't know about you, but I'm tired to death of this perpetual adversity. Why not address our differences in ways we can politely use to resolve them, with respect, instead of trying to employ the equivalent of Zyclon B to quiet your critics? We all know that we're not stupid, and that includes you, so why do you persist in trying to make us all look like we're subservient to you? JF
From: JosephKK on 28 Apr 2010 00:02 On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 06:40:03 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat(a)yahoo.com wrote: >On Apr 26, 11:49 pm, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 08:25:36 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> >On Apr 23, 10:30 pm, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> Take away more of his excuses, post a link for him and email him a copy >> >> of the result from the link. >> >> >It's not my purpose to find Bill a Bill-approved journalist to pre- >> >chew his cud for him. As for myself, why on earth would I depend on a >> >journalism major with half my wits and a quarter my experience to do >> >my thinking for me? >> >> Easy there, James, i am on your side. I have noticed that you have been >> able to pin Bill far better than most of us most of the time. I really, >> really appreciate the way you have examined the scam. > >Sorry Joseph, I wasn't barking at you, but indirectly at Bill. I'd >given him plenty enough info to go on, and didn't feel obliged to >answer his accusations. He should do his homework before calling >someone else a liar. We both wish he would actually do just that. I don't think he is capable of it though. > >I actually research this stuff, I don't just make it up. Sometimes-- >not often--I make mistakes, and I appreciate being corrected, but Bill >was just grousing. I know, i have followed through on your links and checked where you have pointed quite a bit. Your backup is consistently as stated and your analysis typically correct. If and when i do find something i will say something.
From: Bill Sloman on 28 Apr 2010 04:04
On Apr 28, 12:43 am, WarmUnderbelly <WarmUnderbellyOfAmer...(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: > On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 14:59:14 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> Since Medicare reimbursements are already so low that doctors see > >> Medicare patients at a loss, > > >Interesting claim. Do you mean that they make less money per Medicare > >patient than they do from patients with other health insurance, > > Yes, dipshit, they do. > > But the figure they get is also still actually more than the greedy > bastards deserve. > > DOCTORS and the rest of the medical community are to blame for health > care failure, and they are in bed with the insurance companies, and the > proof is the difference between withholdings and company premium payments > back in the seventies with respect to salary and number of family > members, and that of today. > > They are as far off as you are. > > > or are > >Medicare re-imbursements so low that they don't cover the malpractice > >insurance premimium the doctors have to pay for every patient they > >treat? > > You're a goddamned idiot. Actually, we know that you are a goddamned idiot, though you seem to worship a god who is a bit slow to deliver the damnation. Where are the lightning bolts when we could really appreciate them? Back when I was professionally involved with medical ultrasound, half the money paid to US doctors was passed straight on to their medical malpractice insurance company. This may have changed in the intervening decades, but probably not by all that much - medical malpractice is still the business that saves Americas excessively and disproportionately numerous lawyers from having to earm an honest living. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |