lack of respect for that person's right to the honorific
OTOH Some people don't believe in titles of any sort. Even if their the one's who earn them.
English is capable of the same, but to a much more limited degree, and most English speakers don't have the necessary vocabulary to take advantage of it.
And unfortunately, those that do face the situation where the listener can't.
Yes faked audio tape. Before we went in, video statements, after audio where it's not clear who's talking. I'm not stupid, the U.S. government is not stupid, and it likely that two situations apply. 1) The government doesn't want to bet on the likelihood that he's dead, no matter how strong the evidence, because to be wrong would make them look foolish. 2) It's unlikely that they would release info that he had been killed even if know for certain. Dead people become martyrs and inspire retaliation. The murderous pig is dead.
No we're not. Iraq started this war 12 years ago. It has yet to be finished. The terms of the cease fire were dependent on Iraq disarming, they have not therefore the war continues. It's that simple. Case closed.
Uhh, where they say they are and where they actually are are two different things. And they certainly weren't 150 miles in last night. The pentagon just said that ground forces are 100 miles in. Of course that's certainly not all of them.
The difference I was pointing out between symbols and notation is that the particular notation (the coice in symbols used to convey semantic meaning) is what you meant
In case you need it in other words notation is the set of symbols that are used. Using one notation over another is what you describe. This is what it boils to:
Math is not at all about symbols. Math is about quantities abstracted from real things (e.g., numbers and lines
These statements are false. For starters your example is bogus lines and numbers aren't real things. Secondly, quantities abstracted from real things are symbols, no matter what your take on the tangential argument. And thirdly and most importantly, math is solely about symbols. I is an abstract science dealing with the manipulation of symbols regardless of their application.
I shouldn't have brought the other concepts into the discussion. As it stands, it can easily be argued that symbols are all everything is but that is tangential to the conversation, and I really shouldn't have started that thread.
My point is that there is a reality that underlies our mathematical symbology or notation that is completely independent of how we choose to signify it. So, my advice to the original poster was this: begin your study of mathematics by understanding the reality, not by trying to decipher the symbols. The symbols are there to *aid* understanding and signification. If they don't help, don't use them.
That is all syubject to debate. I contend that everything is symbols. You have no way of relating to the world except through symbols, therefore you can't prove that there is any reality apart from them. Additionaly there is no real thing that is 5, or red.
The symbols are there to *aid* understanding and signification. If they don't help, don't use th
You're still using symbols when you mean notation.
Words are symbols, numbers are symbols. Everything is symbols. The difference I was pointing out between symbols and notation is that the particular notation (the coice in symbols used to convey semantic meaning) is what you meant. For example, using a longer list of symbols, (i.e. the long paragraph of words) is simply a different choice of symbols (notation) to describe the concept. The idea that you are getting at, I believe, is that not knowing the conventional notation used for math shouldn't preclude understanding of math itself. A different set of symbols may help the poster with understanding. It won't however be the best choice for communication, since there is a conventional notation.
I know responding to an OT post is wrong but still:
Yeah, having the biggest army in the world is what made Hitler bad. You've got a great understanding of history there. Perhaps you should write a book.
Re:How Math is Done vs. How Math is Presented
on
Imagining Numbers
·
· Score: 1
One (humbling) thing to remember about reading math is that someone was the first to prove these theorems. Not only did this person not know the direction the proof would take in advance, but he/she didn't know either the hypothesis or conclusion either!
Funny, I wouldn't have found that humbling, more like... encouraging.
Hardly. Graphs, automata, sets. All (three among many I should add), that belong to both math and CompSci, and all play a heavy role in programming. If you don't want to understand those things, fine. You can get a job as a code monkey, probably not a secure one, but you can get a job. Just don't expect to be taken seriously, due to extreme lack of knowledge. One of the first (easy) questions I ask an applicant is to draw a state machine for a simple regex. If you can't do that, you have no business designing systems of any kind. Try another field.
I've got new for you... all of those tools use regexes. XML is a regular language, and parser built to work with it use regexes to recognize the tokens.
Or maybe, just maybe, stay with me now: You save all of the strips and burn them to disc. And then you have them for as long as you want, plus you've paid only $10 to get them.
LOL. Actually it wasn't flamebait, but I'll take the label, karma to burn and all. It was actually a joke, and that wasn't even the primary portion of the post, but oh well, some people are uptight some aren't.
Oh and BTW as far as sterotypes go you've thrown out a few yourself, as well as some unfounded generalizations. The difference is, I'm not a hypocrite when I do it.
Re:? that was unnecassary.
on
Lucky Wander Boy
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
I have no problem being called a prick, that's life and I expect as much from people with no sense of humor. I also don't get offended by what people post on/.. So regardless of what you claim outright or imply in your posts, my self image isn't threatened, maybe you should try the same attitude, life will be much easier.
Re:Fucking geek steroetypes.
on
Lucky Wander Boy
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
NONE OF IT IS REAL
Patently untrue bullshit. Sterotypes come into existence for a reason, they are a valid generalization that have aquired a stigma with the onslaught of PC. That's not to say that you can ever apply a sterotype to a particular individual, the chances of every attribute of the sterotype fitting are next to nil.
Sterotypes are a distillation of the common traits of a group. They are valid, however you are correct. You cannot apply them to an individual with any accuracy. However, we're talking about humor here, it's a joke lighten up.
Besides:
God. I have a wife. I have a copy fo MAME. I'm a hard core nerd, my day job is coding z80 ASM for ATM's, my hobby at night is making video games. Yet, I've dated a lot, had a lot of girlfriends
... and I'm just shooting in the dark here. Just maybe it's because having written documentation of communications is a very very VERY good thing? Maybe that's juyst me though.
Slamming a game for having good graphics (Freelancer's graphics are nothing special by the way) is like slamming the Lord of the Rings for the great effects.
Hehe yeah. I always thought that too. I never understood bad graphics elitism. To take your Lords of the Rings analogy a step further how about:
That movie sucked, the effecs were so good I couldn't use my imagination, they should have just scrolled the text from the book up the screen.
Ok let's keep going back, before most people had cars everyone walked. So there's no need for cars. God forbid technology comes along to make life easier.
I would suggest putting the whole title of the game up. I didn't get the Falcon comment until I looked up the game. Some screenshots would have been nice.
Slashdot Mirror
lack of respect for that person's right to the honorific
OTOH Some people don't believe in titles of any sort. Even if their the one's who earn them.
English is capable of the same, but to a much more limited degree, and most English speakers don't have the necessary vocabulary to take advantage of it.
And unfortunately, those that do face the situation where the listener can't.
Yes faked audio tape. Before we went in, video statements, after audio where it's not clear who's talking. I'm not stupid, the U.S. government is not stupid, and it likely that two situations apply. 1) The government doesn't want to bet on the likelihood that he's dead, no matter how strong the evidence, because to be wrong would make them look foolish. 2) It's unlikely that they would release info that he had been killed even if know for certain. Dead people become martyrs and inspire retaliation. The murderous pig is dead.
Bin Laden is dead. You're kidding yourself if you believe differently.
No we're not. Iraq started this war 12 years ago. It has yet to be finished. The terms of the cease fire were dependent on Iraq disarming, they have not therefore the war continues. It's that simple. Case closed.
Uhh, where they say they are and where they actually are are two different things. And they certainly weren't 150 miles in last night. The pentagon just said that ground forces are 100 miles in. Of course that's certainly not all of them.
to recommend some books on the philosophy of science for you to read
Me too
The difference I was pointing out between symbols and notation is that the particular notation (the coice in symbols used to convey semantic meaning) is what you meant
In case you need it in other words notation is the set of symbols that are used. Using one notation over another is what you describe.
This is what it boils to:
Math is not at all about symbols. Math is about quantities abstracted from real things (e.g., numbers and lines
These statements are false. For starters your example is bogus lines and numbers aren't real things. Secondly, quantities abstracted from real things are symbols, no matter what your take on the tangential argument. And thirdly and most importantly, math is solely about symbols. I is an abstract science dealing with the manipulation of symbols regardless of their application.
I shouldn't have brought the other concepts into the discussion. As it stands, it can easily be argued that symbols are all everything is but that is tangential to the conversation, and I really shouldn't have started that thread.
My point is that there is a reality that underlies our mathematical symbology or notation that is completely independent of how we choose to signify it. So, my advice to the original poster was this: begin your study of mathematics by understanding the reality, not by trying to decipher the symbols. The symbols are there to *aid* understanding and signification. If they don't help, don't use them.
That is all syubject to debate. I contend that everything is symbols. You have no way of relating to the world except through symbols, therefore you can't prove that there is any reality apart from them. Additionaly there is no real thing that is 5, or red.
The symbols are there to *aid* understanding and signification. If they don't help, don't use th
You're still using symbols when you mean notation.
Words are symbols, numbers are symbols. Everything is symbols. The difference I was pointing out between symbols and notation is that the particular notation (the coice in symbols used to convey semantic meaning) is what you meant. For example, using a longer list of symbols, (i.e. the long paragraph of words) is simply a different choice of symbols (notation) to describe the concept. The idea that you are getting at, I believe, is that not knowing the conventional notation used for math shouldn't preclude understanding of math itself. A different set of symbols may help the poster with understanding. It won't however be the best choice for communication, since there is a conventional notation.
Yeah, having the biggest army in the world is what made Hitler bad. You've got a great understanding of history there. Perhaps you should write a book.
One (humbling) thing to remember about reading math is that someone was the first to prove these theorems. Not only did this person not know the direction the proof would take in advance, but he/she didn't know either the hypothesis or conclusion either!
Funny, I wouldn't have found that humbling, more like
Math is about quantities abstracted from real things
i.e. symbols. Everything is about symbols. Everything you do, know, and learn. I think you meant "Math is not about notation"
Hardly. Graphs, automata, sets. All (three among many I should add), that belong to both math and CompSci, and all play a heavy role in programming. If you don't want to understand those things, fine. You can get a job as a code monkey, probably not a secure one, but you can get a job. Just don't expect to be taken seriously, due to extreme lack of knowledge. One of the first (easy) questions I ask an applicant is to draw a state machine for a simple regex. If you can't do that, you have no business designing systems of any kind. Try another field.
I've got new for you... all of those tools use regexes. XML is a regular language, and parser built to work with it use regexes to recognize the tokens.
Must be a windows user, a *nix (and by association I imagine an OS X guy) would use wget and be done with it.
</cheap joke>
I lose access to everything
Or maybe, just maybe, stay with me now: You save all of the strips and burn them to disc. And then you have them for as long as you want, plus you've paid only $10 to get them.
LOL. Actually it wasn't flamebait, but I'll take the label, karma to burn and all. It was actually a joke, and that wasn't even the primary portion of the post, but oh well, some people are uptight some aren't.
Oh and BTW as far as sterotypes go you've thrown out a few yourself, as well as some unfounded generalizations. The difference is, I'm not a hypocrite when I do it.
I have no problem being called a prick, that's life and I expect as much from people with no sense of humor. I also don't get offended by what people post on /.. So regardless of what you claim outright or imply in your posts, my self image isn't threatened, maybe you should try the same attitude, life will be much easier.
NONE OF IT IS REAL
Patently untrue bullshit. Sterotypes come into existence for a reason, they are a valid generalization that have aquired a stigma with the onslaught of PC. That's not to say that you can ever apply a sterotype to a particular individual, the chances of every attribute of the sterotype fitting are next to nil.
Sterotypes are a distillation of the common traits of a group. They are valid, however you are correct. You cannot apply them to an individual with any accuracy. However, we're talking about humor here, it's a joke lighten up.
Besides:
God. I have a wife. I have a copy fo MAME. I'm a hard core nerd, my day job is coding z80 ASM for ATM's, my hobby at night is making video games. Yet, I've dated a lot, had a lot of girlfriends
Fat chicks don't count.
Thppppt
... and I'm just shooting in the dark here. Just maybe it's because having written documentation of communications is a very very VERY good thing? Maybe that's juyst me though.
Slamming a game for having good graphics (Freelancer's graphics are nothing special by the way) is like slamming the Lord of the Rings for the great effects.
Hehe yeah. I always thought that too. I never understood bad graphics elitism. To take your Lords of the Rings analogy a step further how about:
That movie sucked, the effecs were so good I couldn't use my imagination, they should have just scrolled the text from the book up the screen.
Ok let's keep going back, before most people had cars everyone walked. So there's no need for cars. God forbid technology comes along to make life easier.
the sounds sound (pardon the pun) the
Not a pun, just poor writing.
I would suggest putting the whole title of the game up. I didn't get the Falcon comment until I looked up the game. Some screenshots would have been nice.