Writing a thesis on the Spineless Tagless G-Machine does not make
one educated except in a very narrow sense.

*slighly rancid ;-)

--
natsu-gusa ya  / tsuwamono-domo-ga / yume no ato
summer grasses / strong ones       / dreams site

Nonsense?  That Hayek paragraph?  Now I am helpless.  I have
absolutely no idea how anybody can think that it is nonsensical.
Disagree, ok (but how can you disagree with a definition?).  But
nonsensical?  Maybe some radical positivist or something...

Regards,
--
Nils Gösche
Ask not for whom the <CONTROL-G> tolls.

  There is, however, irony.

  What on /earth/ did you respond to my article for if you do not even
  know what "rule of law" /means/?

  Instead of your repulsively stupid behavior and disgusting display
  of a severe lack of intelligence, you could simply have looked it up
  and saved yourself the humiliation.  The whole Internet at your
  disposal and what do you do?  You post an /ignorant/ opinion with so
  much invective when you get exposed!

  You are an insult to humankind, Aurélien Campéas.  Recycle yourself.

--
Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway

Who are the X ? The self-designating socialists, for sure...

Both kinds (false liberals and false socialists) play the same old tricks.
Oh, sometimes, so-called socialists try to be more 'Keynesian' (meaning
they value the role of the State as a regulating institution), and the
so-called liberals try to be as 'anti-State' or anti-interventionist or
anti-what-you-want as they can. So that the brave people have a chance to
"make a choice" on the electoral market...

You are not a human, are you ?

You are the next generation of Emacs's Psychiatrist, gone mad.

But that is not so fun, in fact.

Surely you understand that they are neither applicable nor necessary
where rationality suffices.  At least Islamic scholars used to think
like that long time ago.  Religion is intended, I think the argument
went, for things that are squarely beyond the realm of rationality.
Therefore any irrationality one can rationally detect in one's
religious beliefs must be due to one's misunderstanding of religion!
Or so it goes AFAIK.  This argument was partially designed to protect
the image of religion where science was respected.  (eg if science
says A religion says B, it is A and you are misapplying religion).

[...]
    >> that man causes ``global warming´´ and we are supposed, and
    >> able, to do anything about it.  There is absolutely no
    >> scientific proof for this

    AC> There are some hints, though.

Yes, so it appears.  I think Niels is reacting to politicians diluting
the authority of science by asserting scientific validity where none is
available.  The 'left' it seems robbed themselves of appealing to the
authority of God's word and such, but being politicians they have found
other things to pervert.

    >> [cut] This is what I would like to understand -- how do we
    >> magically obtain truths like that without employing
    >> rationality?  (Obviously, I think you can't)

    AC> Yes you can't. This is obvious. But look at your example :
    AC> global warning, Al Gore, etc. This is a matter of politicians
    AC> with an agenda, not science.  Global warning is nothing more
    AC> than the "religion du moment", and politiciancs in this
    AC> instance exhibit the behavior of priests telling bullshit to
    AC> the masses.

Ah, I wish I had read this before typing the above!  I am eliding the
other agreeable stuff.  Carry on guys.   Where's the lisp in all this?

cheers,

Regards,
--
Nils Gösche
Ask not for whom the <CONTROL-G> tolls.

You also missed my longstanding advice to everyone who gets sucked
into a flamewar anywhere with anyone: not every insult needs to be
answered. Some fall short of their mark, others are from people you
won't ever get through to anyway.

Clearly you feel differently, obsessed with answering every
counter-article. You have built your own cage. Free advice: let it go.
Especially if you feel someone said something that missed its mark.
btw, point of logic: you think it possible that I called him a serial
murderer and then cowered in terror (of my master?!) because he asked
(typep *kenny* 'numbnut)?. Weak.

But if you want to persist in this argument, you must first do penance
and find the many threads in which EN and i crossed swords. i do not
think you have been paying attention and/or following cll very long.
we are always lobbing grenades into each other's bunkers.

Your confusion is understandable, because just about the only other
people I criticize here are (sorry) dopes like you who are so enamored
of EN that you try to attach yourselves to his star by attacking him.
What you do not get is that all I ever do is point out that you dopes
are doing what you claim to be opposing, viz, stinking up cll with
non-Lisp chatter.

You then get upset because I pick on you and not EN, but /he/ never
yells at people for conducting flamewars. Get it? I am not for or
against flamewars -- hey, it's Usenet! -- but the inconsistency (oh,
you prefer "hypocrisy") of flaming EN for flaming always gets me
going. Why?

Because flamewars over Lisp are dum enough, but flamewars over
flamewars? Please.

And as for some famous WTC remark, sorry, been snowboarding for a few
days and not even Google seems to have that. What are you tslking
about?

The only quibble I would make is, hey, New York invented reality. They
can deal. I'm from Jersey.

Shame on you for the misquote, tho. You are self-destructing, dude.

The smart assholes (like Gore) are the ones who make trouble.

:)

  It is actually a rather well-quoted line from Full Metal Jacket.

--
Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway

  Huh?  I was covered before?  Are you covered?  Is this some French
  thing?  In my culture, openness, honesty, even directness is valued
  and respected, but it appears that in yours, duplicity and crouching
  under cover is so valued that removing someone's cover is damaging.
  I am unfamiliar with the French culture, but from what little the
  news media report from your country, you appear rabidly racist --
  and your deeply disturbing statement strongly suggests the mental
  workings of a person who searches for and quickly reaches a point
  where he knows /enough/ about someone else.  This kind of attitude
  amazes me whenever I see it -- because to be human is to be able to
  think, without having to tell everybody what you have thought about;
  the obvious corollary is that you can never know /enough/ about any
  other person.  But apparently this is not how French people work.

  Yours is truly one of the most insane comments this newsgroup has
  ever seen.  I can only marvel at the mental damage that preceded it.
  How much of your psychology and behaviour is tied up in preventing
  yourself from being "uncovered" by others?  What are you so afraid
  of that you think such a statement says anything whatsoever about
  any other person than yourself?  You revealed something disturbing
  about yourself with that comment, but I wonder how you can both be
  afraid of being uncovered and at the same time reveal that you are.

  I think I have "uncovered" you, too: Your need to feel in control is
  preventing you from being in control, inviting others to manipulate
  you, instead.

| You are not a human, are you ?

  I am not French, if that is what you imply with this very disturbing
  question.  I am sorry to see that your mental capacity has been so
  far exceeded that you have to resort to such incredible lunacy, but
  this is also quite consistent with what you have shown me up to now:
  When you cannot deal with a fact, you work very hard to deny it.  It
  is a pattern that I had only thought would be found in psychotics,
  and I do not mean that in the usual Usenet insult way, but in its
  clinical meaning.  How does it feel to be you, Aurélien Campéas?
  Are you able to process information or do you make up everything you
  need for your mental well-being?  It is because I jerked you out of
  your cozy psychosis that you have to react the way you do, right?

  But now I wonder, did you ever get as far in your erudition that you
  looked up "rule of law" and figured out what a jackass you have been
  in this forum and for what you will now be remembered?

  This newsgroup sure gets a large share of deeply disturbed people.

  Are there more like you at home, Aurélien?  Are there someone I can
  talk to, some more French people, perhaps, to learn what it means
  for someone like you to be uncovered?  It is such a deeply twisted
  thing to say.  Perhaps I should just conclude that you are insane?

--
Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway

  You know, well-adjusted people in this technological age make do
  with the message-id.  <3251210602491...@naggum.no>

  I think those who are inclined to listen to you should reread it and
  try to decide if you have just seriously malfunctioned.  You are the
  only person so far who has been able to show such a lack of ability
  to read that you think it was about me.  It was about you, you see.
  Your strange reaction suggests that you fight me because you are so
  self-centered and self-absorbed that when someone else makes a
  presence in your solipstistic universe, you have to regain control
  over yourself by expelling that other person.  Such obsessive people
  have been cured, however.  Others of your kind waste away their
  lives reading about celebrities, but for some reason I think less
  lowly of those than of you.  

  I am actually amazed that you managed to get /none/ of the points I
  made in that article.  People of your calibre tend to get at least
  one.  All you got was the "feeling".  What kinds of drugs are you on
  who /both/ manage to obsess about me and /not/ read what I write?

| He calls me uneducated for disliking him

  Fascinatingly untrue.  With a mind like that, I understand why you
  need a PhD so people are discouraged from making up their own mind
  about your mental abilities.  I hope you have paid a lot for it so
  your money comes to better uses than your well-being.

| and then he writes that I may have a Ph.D. [1], and still be
| illiterate.

  If you object to this, why do you insist upon showing the whole
  world that you /cannot/ read what I write?  You are not behaving in
  a way that suggests you are terribly bright, you know.

| Doesn't this make for a very "narrow" definition of education?

  It appears that you really think a PhD will give you an /education/.
  Please go to the bursar's office and ask for your money back.  Sorry
  about wasting your life and your dreams, though, but I understand
  why you get so upset.  If I had been in your shoes and had wasted my
  life getting a PhD only to be hired by McD so I would not be able to
  pay back the gigantic loans you needed (it took 15 years, right?), I
  would be spending my time on Usenet showing others of your kind that
  they should take the McD job right away, too.

  You have an /education/ when you realize, to the depth of your soul,
  that your own contribution to the furthering of mankind has to build
  upon the work of millions of people preceding you, people whose best
  of hope of eternal life is being mentioned with a brief paragraph in
  the largest encyclopedia, and realizing that /your/ best hope of
  making your mark on human history is vastly slimmer than that.

| BTW I don't believe I mentioned my views on the American foreign
| policy on USENET once.

  Thank God!

| His having written that long Nazi-like facts-distorting European
| supremacist tirade is a clear indication of mental issues.

  If I had written a long Nazi-like facts-distorting European
  supremacist tirade, I think it would be a clear indication of mental
  issues, too.  But I did not, you know.  It is your illiteracy that
  got the better of you, again.  Are you quite certain that you are
  not making up monsters under your bed to be afraid of?  Perhaps you
  should try waking up from that horrible dream you are living?  Or
  perhaps just stop taking those halluincogenic drugs.

| [1] Which I do expect to earn later this year.

  Really?  I intend to block that process.  Demonstrating that you
  would be a disgrace to the degree-grantor should be quite easy.

  I occasionally hear from people who have found that there is a good
  correlation between unemployable people and their stupid fights with
  me on the Net.  I enjoy this feedback tremendously, and I am quite
  certain that when someone who considers hiring you will look up the
  name Oleg Inconnu, if that is your real name, and decide that you
  are not worth considering.  Again, McD does not do such searches.

| P.S. I don't think I'm going to have much time for explaining what
| is wrong with Naggum to every newcomer he attacks. Perhaps I will
| write a FAQ about it if enough people request it in email or
| volunteer to contribute.

  Somebody should keep this and remind of it sometime.  It should be
  the kind of idiocy that keeps people out of important positions.

--
Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway

Education has little to do with literacy. Only that one of the aims of
education are towards people's becoming educated. Something that
appears to have failed in your case.

Thanks,

I'm going partners in a biotech startup with people who knew me well for
_five_ years.

BTW, that was the most shameless FUD I've ever seen. Who exactly did you
prevent from being employed? Name two. No, name one. "Correlation"! You
aren't educated enough to use the term correctly, and you aren't smart
enough to avoid using it.

Oleg

But thanks for thus revealing your own psychotic political views.

The destruction of the WTC was an attack on western civilization
itself, the most successful, most humane, most artistically, morally
and intellectually superior culture that ever did flourish upon this
planet.

Please, never let Erik, or anyone else, dissuade you from posting to
c.l.l.  It's this kind of article that makes my life worthwhile.  A
little practice and you'll be up there with the all-time c.l.l greats.

  Quite right, I did not.  One reason for that is that is so insane
  as to question not only your mental capacity, but your sanity.
  Since you did not expect me to get it, it at least suggests that
  you are aware how insane it was.  I guess this is progress.

| You may fool a couple of simpletons on USENET into listening to
| you, but that's where it ends.

  This suggests that you know you are a fool and set out to prove
  otherwise by getting a degree.  Thank you for confirming it.

| I'm going partners in a biotech startup with people who knew me
| well for _five_ years.

  They knew you well for that long?  Man, that must be good!

| BTW, that was the most shameless FUD I've ever seen.

  So it worked on you.  Oderint dum metuant.

--
Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway

--
natsu-gusa ya     / tsuwamono-domo-ga / yume no ato
summer grasses / strong ones          / dreams site

So they managed to cram all of western civilisation into those two
towers ?

Must have been pretty crowded.

--
natsu-gusa ya     / tsuwamono-domo-ga / yume no ato
summer grasses / strong ones          / dreams site

My understanding is that computer science is now an engineering
discipline: the deployment of working systems is what matters.

How many peer-reviewed papers did Seymour Cray publish?  Does anyone
care?