- "doesn't sound much like a bee to me" - "It's an aardvark, it's a bloody aardvark" ----------
Blackadder, trying to rewrite the first english dictionary (by Dr Johnson), which was toasted by Baldric (in the fireplace).
Other definitions: a - doesn't really mean anything. C - big blue wobbly thing. dog - not a cat......
oh, i totally agree with that. big chunk of the nastiness in the world comes from peoples failure to get this. at a lot of cocktail parties, when religon comes up, my standard answer is always to agree with the majority view, as it is safest. [grin]
of course, when i am with friends, drinking, it's most fun to play the devil's advocate. irritating habit tho...
was just nipicking with my original arguement:P but... as you say, the action is important. and therin is the value of deconstruction to a person. --> as a means, not an 'end-in-itself'. shanat
but.. a paradox isn't something with no answer. a paradox consists of conflicting propositions. no?
anyway, i understand (i think) your argument:
1) the universe is subjective:
2) deconstruction is an objective process --> the result of deconstruction (say R) is objective.
3) but R belongs to the universe
--> therefore R is subjective. Contradiction.
No disagreement there,
however, you are using that to demonstrate:
1) every topic of discussion is subjective
2) communication is an objective process --> the result of communication (say C) is objective
3) but C is a topic of discussion --> therefore C is subjective [here you say 'communication is impossible' in place of subjective]
and my argument is with your use of " communication is impossible"
instead of "comunnication is subjective"
hence all that 100% transfer of info, and the reconstruction of info during communication. i believe communication is subjective, that does not mean i believe it is impossible.:) shanat
but.. a paradox isn't something with no answer. a paradox consists of conflicting propositions. no?
anyway, i understand (i think) your argument:
1) the universe is subjective:
2) deconstruction is an objective process --> the result of deconstruction (say R) is objective.
3) but R belongs to the universe
--> therefore R is subjective. Contradiction.
No disagreement there,
however, you are using that to demonstrate:
1) every topic of discussion is subjective
2) communication is an objective process --> the result of communication (say C) is objective
3) but C is a topic of discussion
--> therefore C is subjective [here you say 'communication is impossible' in place of subjective]
and my argument is with your use of
" communication is impossible"
instead of
"comunnication is subjective"
hence all that 100% transfer of info, and the reconstruction of info during communication.
i believe communication is subjective,
that does not mean i believe it is impossible.:)
shanat
"Yet if every topic of discussion is subjective, this implies that communication is impossible.."
why?
IMHO this implies that 100% accurate transmission of ideas is impossible....but in the 'real' world, we need to get enough of the idea across, for the other person to be able to reconstruct it in their minds, and then they say 'ah, i see what you mean'.
hey ,
that is really funny.
but he also says that reading of a computer screen hurts his eyes (blinding), -->could it be a subtle reference to 'Name OT Rose Part 2' where the computer geek who reads off a computer screen is killed, by a braile-terminal hacker-guru who does not want him to read Knuth Volume 5 ?
hello,
I live in bombay, India. 10 minutes away from the redhat office. currently i am working with an NGO
(social work - teaching math to slum children) called akanksha (akanksha.org).
Anyway, i was just wondering what your(redhat) position is regarding social work. would you consider helping us out if you can? with a little space for a classroom, and some older computers, for the kids to use; as right now, we do not have any computer labs. it might work both ways, as you should get some positive publicity, it will help to fix the whole open source/ community service idea in peoples minds --> the association of Redhat with Linux and the association of gnu/linux with the community. i was contemplating going to the Redhat office and talking to them about this, but then the ask-slashdot happened, and i thought it would be easier/sensible? to ask you first. i would like to know what redhat's stance is on this... i know redhat needs to be a profitable business first, and a charity later. so if it cant be done , i understand..... but once microsoft has been beaten, and all of redhat's employees are trillionaires
i will ask this of you again.:P
Mod Parent Up! insightful so right,
i wish true international language support would happen, both for the end user and the programmer, sys admin etc.
eg C in Japanese,
the english language, has forced us into programming according to their grammatical structure. imperitives, and other stuff. really, computer programming (at the application level) is not language independent. ebglish is my first language, but in my country, where the majority do not speak english, it is irritating, cause: they cannot use computers productively at all. and i am not talking about language packs. mostly the work, but you need a decent grasp of english to be able to use them for any purpose.
actually, i think i can broaden this to any roman script based language. they are all pretty similar. (compare to chinese, hindi and mayan)
this is needful important
as an indian programmer, i must admit that i find your sig offensive.
>> Open source development is my way of
>> competing with the low-cost programmers in
>> India
Slashdot Mirror
imagine that! do most people think that the 'grapes of wrath' == movie?? pretty scary
hey,
sorry but i couldn't resist
"I am a girl in the gamming world"
gamming: slang for fellatio, like giving a blowjob, sucking d**k etc...
ah, sweet joy of pointing out other people's mistakes
- "doesn't sound much like a bee to me" .....
- "It's an aardvark, it's a bloody aardvark"
----------
Blackadder, trying to rewrite the first english dictionary (by Dr Johnson), which was toasted by Baldric (in the fireplace).
Other definitions:
a - doesn't really mean anything.
C - big blue wobbly thing.
dog - not a cat.
oh, i totally agree with that. :P
big chunk of the nastiness in the world comes from peoples failure to get this. at a lot of cocktail parties, when religon comes up, my standard answer is always to agree with the majority view, as it is safest. [grin]
of course, when i am with friends, drinking, it's most fun to play the devil's advocate. irritating habit tho...
was just nipicking with my original arguement
but... as you say, the action is important. and therin is the value of deconstruction to a person.
--> as a means, not an 'end-in-itself'.
shanat
but.. a paradox isn't something with no answer. a paradox consists of conflicting propositions. no?
:)
anyway, i understand (i think) your argument:
1) the universe is subjective:
2) deconstruction is an objective process --> the result of deconstruction (say R) is objective.
3) but R belongs to the universe
--> therefore R is subjective. Contradiction.
No disagreement there,
however, you are using that to demonstrate:
1) every topic of discussion is subjective
2) communication is an objective process --> the result of communication (say C) is objective
3) but C is a topic of discussion
--> therefore C is subjective [here you say 'communication is impossible' in place of subjective]
and my argument is with your use of
" communication is impossible"
instead of
"comunnication is subjective"
hence all that 100% transfer of info, and the reconstruction of info during communication.
i believe communication is subjective,
that does not mean i believe it is impossible.
shanat
but.. a paradox isn't something with no answer. a paradox consists of conflicting propositions. no? anyway, i understand (i think) your argument: 1) the universe is subjective: 2) deconstruction is an objective process --> the result of deconstruction (say R) is objective. 3) but R belongs to the universe --> therefore R is subjective. Contradiction. No disagreement there, however, you are using that to demonstrate: 1) every topic of discussion is subjective 2) communication is an objective process --> the result of communication (say C) is objective 3) but C is a topic of discussion --> therefore C is subjective [here you say 'communication is impossible' in place of subjective] and my argument is with your use of " communication is impossible" instead of "comunnication is subjective" hence all that 100% transfer of info, and the reconstruction of info during communication. i believe communication is subjective, that does not mean i believe it is impossible. :)
shanat
"Yet if every topic of discussion is subjective, this implies that communication is impossible.." why? IMHO this implies that 100% accurate transmission of ideas is impossible. ...but in the 'real' world, we need to get enough of the idea across, for the other person to be able to reconstruct it in their minds, and then they say 'ah, i see what you mean'.
hey , that is really funny. but he also says that reading of a computer screen hurts his eyes (blinding), -->could it be a subtle reference to 'Name OT Rose Part 2' where the computer geek who reads off a computer screen is killed, by a braile-terminal hacker-guru who does not want him to read Knuth Volume 5 ?
math. school level, 12-16 year olds and i really like this job. das all,
hello, I live in bombay, India. 10 minutes away from the redhat office. currently i am working with an NGO (social work - teaching math to slum children) called akanksha (akanksha.org). Anyway, i was just wondering what your(redhat) position is regarding social work. would you consider helping us out if you can? with a little space for a classroom, and some older computers, for the kids to use; as right now, we do not have any computer labs. it might work both ways, as you should get some positive publicity, it will help to fix the whole open source/ community service idea in peoples minds --> the association of Redhat with Linux and the association of gnu/linux with the community. i was contemplating going to the Redhat office and talking to them about this, but then the ask-slashdot happened, and i thought it would be easier/sensible? to ask you first. i would like to know what redhat's stance is on this... i know redhat needs to be a profitable business first, and a charity later. so if it cant be done , i understand. .... but once microsoft has been beaten, and all of redhat's employees are trillionaires
i will ask this of you again. :P
dilbert, from one of the ominbuses
Mod Parent Up! insightful so right, i wish true international language support would happen, both for the end user and the programmer, sys admin etc. eg C in Japanese, the english language, has forced us into programming according to their grammatical structure. imperitives, and other stuff. really, computer programming (at the application level) is not language independent. ebglish is my first language, but in my country, where the majority do not speak english, it is irritating, cause: they cannot use computers productively at all. and i am not talking about language packs. mostly the work, but you need a decent grasp of english to be able to use them for any purpose. actually, i think i can broaden this to any roman script based language. they are all pretty similar. (compare to chinese, hindi and mayan) this is needful important
hey, that is really funny. LOL
isnt that the whole point of the open source economic model vis commercial apps? i.e. buy once, run anywhere you want
as an indian programmer, i must admit that i find your sig offensive. >> Open source development is my way of >> competing with the low-cost programmers in >> India