- spinoza programming language status report (or, disruptive technologyis always late)
- Posted by Richard Heathfield on May 16th, 2008
spinoza1111 said:
<snip>
You've demonstrated that same inability yourself. Therefore, either your
claim is incorrect or you don't belong in this group either.
--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
- Posted by Qwertyioup on May 16th, 2008
On Fri, 16 May 2008 09:21:53 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
<spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
You're really a complete wacko if you believe someone is going to
write "software that is activated......blah blah blah..." for a coke
vending machine. An install it in your neighbor's yard, in a rural
village. To make HK$3. (About 40c US). When he could make TWICE AS
MUCH PROFIT JUST SELLING THE COKES AT FULL PRICE. And not have his
machine smashed within a week by frustrated customers either.
You are either
1) An idiot.
2) A troll.
3) Off your meds.
Or some combination of the above.
You raised the issue in this group, you invite a response here.
Keep off "your seat on the ferry", now keep out of "your newsgroup"?
Same three choices as above.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
- Posted by spinoza1111 on May 17th, 2008
On May 17, 1:05*am, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
I'd be careful with that, Mister AndOrAndOrAndOrAnd.
- Posted by spinoza1111 on May 17th, 2008
On May 17, 2:31*am, Qwertyioup <Qwertyi...@none.com> wrote:
You've made it clear that you lack analytical ability and don't belong
here, since you believe that the owner of the vending machine's real
cost doesn't include management and labor. You haven't factored in the
cost of ferrying the coke cans. Nor have you taken into account that
the scam makes money primarily when the machine is out of stock, which
businesses are increasingly these days. Nor have you taken account the
fact that people, being both stupid and evil, might prefer to make
less money in scamming than they could in a legitimate business...for
the SAME reason people stalk people on the internet, profiting not and
making asses out of themselves.
You saw an ad somewhere, and were taken in: Coke wholesale for $2 HK
the can. Because you're a glorified clerk on the job, you forgot to
figure out that you might have to pay some of the homeboys to bring
the inventory over on the ferry. Because you're a small time chump,
you can't get the volume discounts the ethical stores get.
So, perhaps, you are now operating an empty vending machine jiggered
so as to retain dollar coins and reject five dollar coins. You're not
trying to make a profit anymore, merely recoup the cost of the vending
machine so you can repay the Triad playuhs which loaned you the money.
No, "have a seat where you belong, with people that you can talk to
about a place that you know".
- Posted by spinoza1111 on May 17th, 2008
On May 17, 1:05*am, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
You've got a stalker in this newsgroup who might engage my physical
safety because he's local, and he's not qualified to post on
programming. You're always yapping about the rules, but as a bully and
a coward, you're doing nothing about the stalker.
- Posted by Richard Heathfield on May 17th, 2008
spinoza1111 said:
<shrug> Your misrepresentation doesn't alter the facts.
--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
- Posted by Richard Heathfield on May 17th, 2008
spinoza1111 said:
How, precisely, does one "engage" physical safety? Do you mean "endanger"?
If so, take it up with the police, if you aren't too embarrassed to
suggest to them that you might be endangered because some guy on Usenet
argues with you occasionally.
*Everyone* is free to post here - even you. This "qwertyuiop" character is
doing far less damage to this group than you are. If you pay no attention
to the rules, why should he? What makes you so special that you can use
this newsgroup as your personal toilet, and yet attempt to deny others the
right to post here?
--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
- Posted by Qwertyioup on May 18th, 2008
On Sat, 17 May 2008 13:14:36 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
<spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Yes, Richard as Pope of comp.programming should immediately send his
elite Swiss Guards to Lamma to protect you from being contradicted and
while they're here, they could get your $3 back from the vending
machine.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
- Posted by Qwertyioup on May 18th, 2008
On Sat, 17 May 2008 13:12:49 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
<spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Youre the idiot that maintains that $3 > $6.
Is parsing that beyond your analytical ability?
Really, take your meds. You see conspiracies when a vending machine
fails to give you a refund. You see stalkers behind every bush. And
Nazis are everywhere.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
- Posted by spinoza1111 on May 18th, 2008
On May 18, 4:27*am, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
Nobody should have to put up with the personal abuse you deliberately
incite. Nor was usenet meant to be used to violate the law by enabling
creeps to stalk people. I certainly didn't expect you to protest his
conduct, because you're a bully and a thug. But at least you're on
topic and qualified to speak on topic: quertyuiop is apparently a
moderator of www.lamma.COM.HK who is using this group exclusively to
stalk me. I simply wanted to make a point that as a coward, bully, and
a thug, you're full of bull anytime you make reference to rules.
- Posted by spinoza1111 on May 18th, 2008
On May 18, 12:58*pm, Qwertyioup <Qwertyi...@none.com> wrote:
You're plonked. If you want to talk to me, introduce yourself like a
man or go to the Free Lamma group.
- Posted by Qwertyioup on May 18th, 2008
On Sat, 17 May 2008 22:22:32 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
<spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
- Posted by Mike on May 18th, 2008
In article <3f05631e-6f26-484c-89cd-8e096e323629@q1g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, spinoza1111@yahoo.com says...
developed the modern concept of the luminiferous aether. His view on the subject was strongly supported by that well-
known dead-ender - James Clerk Maxwall.
Mike
- Posted by Mike on May 18th, 2008
In article <94eaff41-fef3-46dc-80d3-11e456965da2@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com>, spinoza1111@yahoo.com says...
Edward, I found this tiny snippet of possibly on-subject material in your post.
It intrigues me. Are you suggesting that if you initialised the data structures that the program referred to it ceased
to work? Something of the form (in pseudo-code)...?
//Working, but non-conforming code
type
Data : DataStructure;
begin
while SomeCondition do
OperateOn(Data);
end;
//Conforming, but non-working code
type
Data : DataStructure;
begin
InitialiseIt(Data);
while SomeCondition do
OperateOn(Data);
end;
Mike
