Linux-Advocacy Digest #471, Volume #29 Thu, 5 Oct 00 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Off-topic Idiots (Was Bush v. Gore on taxes) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Off-topic Idiots (Was Bush v. Gore on taxes) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Mike Mccarty Sr)
Re: Linux - - Troll
Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Off Topic Q. for Programmers: HTML renderer in C? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (WickedDyno)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (WickedDyno)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (ZnU)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Off-topic Idiots (Was Bush v. Gore on taxes)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:02:00 +0000
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 11:01:19 -0400, "David T. Johnson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.sys.mac.advocacy wrote:
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 13:42:34 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] in
>> comp.sys.mac.advocacy wrote:
>>
>> >Donovan Rebbechi writes:
>> >
>> >> David T. Johnson wrote:
>> >
>> >>> Marty wrote:
>> >
>> >>>>>>> Congratulations to all of you.
>> >
>> >>>>>> He's not only the club President, he's also a member!
>> >
>> >>>>> Your typical garbled, illogical, nonsensical comment.
>> >>>>> Maybe you should do some work on that "Grad School in Texas" thread.
>> >
>> >>>> Reading comprehension problems? How ironic, given you grammatically
>> >>>> incorrect statements.
>> >
>> >>> Your 'given you grammatically incorrect statements' is itself
>> >>> grammatically incorrect which is even more ironic. But what should
>> >
>> >> Now that's what I call a Tholen-war.
>> >
>> >Inappropriately.
>>
>> Be quiet turd, you shamed us all with your cowardice.
>
>I like ironing for someone who posts annonymously.
Sorry, I already have a maid.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Off-topic Idiots (Was Bush v. Gore on taxes)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:02:02 +0000
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 10:47:54 -0400, "David T. Johnson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.sys.mac.advocacy wrote:
>
>
>Marty wrote:
>>
>> "David T. Johnson" wrote:
>> >
>> > Marty wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > But what should anyone expect from someone whose thoughts are so poorly
>> > > > formed that he writes illogical, nonsense sentences about club presidents
>> > > > who are also members?
>> > >
>> > > Never seen a "Hair Club For Men" commercial, eh?
>> > >
>> > > > > Meanwhile, I see you're still hypocritically contributing to off-topic
>> > > > > threads. No surprise there.
>> >
>> > No surprise that you make no sense. Is the "Hair Club for Men"
>> > commercial part of the additional information needed to figure out what
>> > your are attempting to say? If so, you should reference it to help
>> > those unfortunate few who are slogging their way through your posts.
>> > Based on your recent posts, there must be some other commercials needed,
>> > as well.
>>
>> "You just... don't get it, do you? You don't."
>> "Why must I be surrounded by frickin idiots??"
>> -- Dr. Evil
>
>Do you feel that this is this a common state of affairs for you? If so,
>perhaps you need to reevaluate your surroundings since you fail to
>impress me as being extraordinarily bright, yourself.
>
>>
>> > > > Unlike you, I have pointed out that the thread in question does not
>> > > > belong in the newsgroups in which it is being posted.
>> > >
>> > > ... which itself doesn't belong in this newsgroup.
>> >
>> > You point to my 2 or 3 posts in that thread on that subject as not
>> > belonging but you completely ignore the hundreds of similar posts made
>> > in the "Bush vs. Gore on Taxes" thread over the last few weeks.
>> > H-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e.
>>
>> Do you even know what the word means? Let's take a moment to re-acquaint
>> ourselves with the word's meaning before making a bigger fool of yourself...
>>
>> hypocrite \Hyp"o*crite\, n. [F., fr. L. hypocrita, Gr. ? one who plays a part
>> on the stage, a dissembler, feigner. See Hypocrisy.]
>> One who plays a part; especially, one who, for the purpose of winning
>> approbation of favor, puts on a fair outside seeming; one who feigns to be
>> other and better than he is; a false pretender to virtue or piety; one who
>> simulates virtue or piety.
>>
>> Was I taking a part in the "Bush vs. Gore on Taxes" thread before you stepped
>> in?
>
>Interesting that you admit that it was my entry into the thread that
>prompted your own entry. My posts expressed an opinion on the off-topic
>nature of the posts on economics and politics in COOA. Your posts, that
>you admit were prompted by my entry, were merely garbled and illogical
>attempts at insults. Further evidence of your hypocrisy.
>
>> Furthermore, was I starting additional off-topic threads like you were
>> about Chris? In addition, was I accusing others of being off-topic, other
>> than my pointing to your hypocrisy? The hypocrite is you David.
>
>I posted my advice on a suggested response to the Wenham pattern of
>posting. Your logic is confused but you seem to be suggesting that this
>post was hypocrisy. If that is your claim, I would definitely
>disagree. As for the off-topic posts, you admit that you entered the
>thread solely because I had previously entered it yet, with your
>question above, you claim to be superior to what you term as my
>hypocrisy. I entered the thread to comment on the numerous off-topic
>posts cluttering the newsgroup. You entered the thread to hurl
>insults. By your own definition of hypocrisy (one who feigns to be
>other and better than he is) you are a hypocrite.
>
>>
>> > > Were you also pointing out that a thread doesn't belong when you said:
>> > > "Probably Wenham will be hugely impressed by the capabilities of this OS/2
>> > > software and will soon post here with his new enthusiasm. Heh, heh."
>> >
>> > Seems a valid comment to me about Wenham's perceived enthusiasm for OS/2
>> > software. This is the COOA newsgroup, after all. OS/2 is in the title.
>>
>> And where does such a comment lead? Does it give way to cogent, on-topic
>> material? Or does it turn an otherwise informational thread into a flame
>> war? Isn't that what you claim you've been fighting against? Or is it ok for
>> you to do, but not ok for others?
>
>Now you seeming to be claiming to know my thought processes and your
>objection to my post seems to be based on what you believe those thought
>processes to be. At least this is a new comment. Your old ones
>('hypocrite,' 'liar,' 'troll,' et. al.) are boring. But no, AFAIK, you
>do not know my thought processes and your opinion of those thought
>processes is irrelevant. My comment was valid. Your opinions about the
>effect it might have on others or my thought processes when I made it do
>not diminish its validity.
>
>>
>> > > Or how about when you started off the "Wenham Advice" thread?
>> >
>> > Seemed and seems a valid comment (to me, anyway) to make about someone
>> > who has exhibited a pattern of posting about OS/2 subjects in many
>> > different threads in hundreds of posts.
>>
>> What seems to you is irrelevant.
>
>Ignoring the usual grammatical errors, this seems to neatly summarize
>your online opinion of every post that you disagree with.
>
>
>>
>> > > You're a mime and a liar, not to mention a hypocrite.
>> >
>> > Mime? Liar? Am not! Am not!
>>
>> Prove it, if you think you can.
>
>Why should I bother? You obviously had no evidence to begin with. No
>surprise there.
>
>>
>> > > > No surprise that understanding eludes you on this point.
>> > >
>> > > The lack of understanding is entirely your own, troll.
>> >
>> > Troll? Your post is riddled with name-calling but very few thoughts or
>> > comments and what there is is nearly incoherent.
>>
>> How ironic, given that last statement.
>>
>> > I am getting tired trying to extract some meaning from your heaps of
>> > words.
>>
>> Sorry that your reading comprehension isn't up to par. I'll try to dumb it
>> down for you in the future.
>
>I doubt that your typical comments can be "dumbed" down any further.
So you did it for him.
You are a good friend and maid.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:20:47 GMT
The biggest problem is the candidates definition of "Middle Class:.
Sorry someone making 25k in NY is poor, not middle class.
They need to get out of this 50-100k salaried workers being the
wealthy in this country.
claire
On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 19:26:45 GMT, "Chad"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8riija$23c$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > How it's SUPPOSED to work or how it actually DOES work? The two are
>> > very different indeed.
>>
>> I suspect that no one in this thread understands the details of either one.
>>
>> One of the very interesting things that people of this type seem to miss is
>that
>> in actuality, only a very tiny percentage (if any at all) of their tax dollars
>goes
>> towards welfare at all. In fact, until the clinton administration, every last
>> penny of the federal income tax of everyone who lived west of the missisippi
>> river went toward paying off the interest on the national debt. Now that we
>> have been running positive for a few years and tax spending has been
>restructured
>> nearly entirely, again, little or no amount of your taxes go towards
>supporting
>> anyone on welfare.
>
>WHAT?! Are you kidding? Have you seen a recent budget? More than 1/3 of the
>U.S. budget goes to supporting Welfare and welfare related programs.
>
>-Chad
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Mccarty Sr)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: 5 Oct 2000 20:00:07 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matt Kennel <REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN> wrote:
)On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 09:54:00 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
):
):IBM's GREATEST MISTAKE was making a machine which anybody could
):copy in his garage.
)
)As I remember the story, they published all the hardware specification
)and BIOS disassembly assuming that if anybody tried to make a 100% copy
)that IBM could easily sue them out of business.
)
)Compaq did make a copy and IBM was shocked to lose the suit, and
)the market thereafter.
[snip]
Eagle made a "near copy" and lost and went out of business. Compaq made
a "not near copy" and stayed in business.
--
char *p="char *p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I don't speak for Alcatel <- They make me say that.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux - - Troll
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:23:20 -0000
On Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:15:34 +0100, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Dave Ratcliffe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fecking
>> Hill) wrote:
>> >>>>>Flaagg escribió en artículo:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> I'm downloading all 640 megs of the Linux Mandrake 7 ISO. I
>> >>>>>> just might install it, too.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Don't ask me why.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>I'd reinstall on *this* computer, but that would mean losing
>> >>>>>my pr0n archive hard drive. Two gigs, daily downloads and
>> >>>>>I still haven't found any porn stars with clean fingernails.
>> >>>>>
>> >
>> >Unix suxks
>>
>> Mose people without the capacity to understand things more difficult than
>> "pull this tab to open" say that.
>>
>
>I dunno, I'm not overly fond of Unix. Still, if everyone used it, who would
>you feel superior too? ;-)
Perhaps people that used it in the form of reliable, easy to
use embedded systems (like Tivo) rather than as a general
purpose device.
--
Captain Penny's Law:
You can fool all of the people some of the time, and
some of the people all of the time, but you Can't Fool Mom.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:26:33 -0000
On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 18:32:07 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
>on Wed, 4 Oct 2000 11:58:35 -0500
><A4JC5.4088$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>"David M. Butler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> > I beg to differ. Personal web server is based on IIS 5.0 under Windows
>>> > 2000, and it SMOKES apache in almost every way.
>>>
>>> Which is obviously why Apache is used so much more widely, right?
>>
>>And what makes you think that apache is used more widely? I don't think
>>there are any statistics to back this up, unless of course you mean "More
>>domain names are hosted on apache servers", but that doesn't mean it's used
>>in more physical servers. It may be, but I don't see any evidence to
>>support that other than wishful thinking.
>>
>>Netcrafts numbers simply do not paint the full picture.
>
>I strongly suspect -- from cursory research -- that they can't
>differentiate between "website that is up" and "website that is
>actively working, soliciting business, answering questions,
>and servicing users".
>
>A pity, for it would be nice to have a breakdown by Total Megabytes of
>Data Served, or perhaps Megabytes Per Hour, as opposed to a mere
>tabulation of websites. One might liken Netcraft's methods to
>poking a needle into a cage in complete darkness, drawing a minute
>quantity of blood (bandwidth), then saying "See, there's an animal
>in there." Can't tell whether it's a shrew or a gorilla without
>further testing, though. :-)
>
>Would IIS (NT/W2K) win? Possibly. I don't know, really, and I suspect
>very few people do.
People have already broken down the netcraft numbers thusly
by using extra metrics to narrow the population of "acceptable"
websites. In very few instances does this really benefit IIS
in terms of appearances.
You have to work really hard to cook webserver data such that
IIS looks any better than it would otherwise. Netscape seems to
be the vendor that ends up gaining most from such endeavors.
--
Justice, n.:
A decision in your favor.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Off Topic Q. for Programmers: HTML renderer in C?
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:22:53 GMT
I know this is an advocacy newsgroup, but more programmers seem to hang
out here than in the Linux-c-dev newsgroup, so I thought I'd ask.
I want to incorporate some sort of HTML/XML/SGML/WHATEVERML rendering
engine into a program I'm writing, using C and GTK+. I looked into
ripping Gecko off the Mozilla project, but they're pretty locked into
C++.
Most importantly, it'd need to display text, have hyperlinking
capabilities and the ability to execute a small snippet of code (pop up
a dialogue box, pop up a list box).
Where does something like this exist? Or am I smoking crack? Am I going
to have to bite the bullet and rewrite everything to work with Gtk--?
Any help would be appreciated.
-ws
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: WickedDyno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 16:42:43 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> WickedDyno wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > WickedDyno wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > : On 1 Oct 2000 15:13:23 GMT, Joseph T. Adams wrote:
> > > > > > :>In comp.os.linux.advocacy JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > :>In many urban areas in the U.S., urban decay, crime, and the
> > > > > > :>middle-class flight syndrome (often mistakenly labeled "white
> > > > > > :>flight")
> > > > > >
> > > > > > : How mistaken is the label ? I was in Newark NJ for a while,
> > > > > > : and I
> > > > > > : remember
> > > > > > : walking along crowded streets where I was the only "white
> > > > > > : person"
> > > > > > : (
> > > > > > : whatever
> > > > > > : that means ) in sight. Of course, it's also true that all the
> > > > > > : middle
> > > > > > : class
> > > > > > : African Americans who used to live there also seem to have
> > > > > > : packed
> > > > > > : their
> > > > > > : bags and moved to the suburbs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That is precisely the difference. It isn't that white people
> > > > > > don't
> > > > > > want to live in terrible areas, but, rather that NO ONE wants
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > live
> > > > > > in those areas. All but the very poorest leave.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For a variety of reasons, most of which are not their fault,
> > > > > > Black
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > Hispanic and other minority citizens are greatly
> > > > > > overrepresented in
> > > > >
> > > > > Low-IQ correlates with low incomes and unemployment.
> > > >
> > > > IQ correlates even more strongly with education.
> > >
> > > Of course... retards generally don't make it into college.
> >
> > Neither do those with low incomes or unemployment.
>
> Wrong. Millions of people go to college while earning
> what is considered to be "poverty level" incomes.
Note the word "generally".
--
| Andrew Glasgow <amg39(at)cornell.edu> |
| SCSI is *NOT* magic. There are *fundamental technical |
| reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat |
| to your SCSI chain now and then. -- John Woods |
------------------------------
From: WickedDyno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 16:44:39 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, STATIC66
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 12:34:41 GMT, Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Wrong. Millions of people go to college while earning
> >> what is considered to be "poverty level" incomes.
> >
> > ROTFL. Their tuition is always subsidized, however, whether by their
> >parents or by government-backed loan guarantees. Furthermore, most
> >college students come from middle-class or upper-class homes, meaning
> >that they got much more in handouts from their parents than most poor
> >kids do.
>
> So a parent being responsible and planning for the future of their
> offspring rather than turning to the government with an outstretched
> hand is somehow bad. That is not a handout its called responsibility.
> >
> > Also, dealing in illegal drugs is not living off of handouts.
>
> NO it is criminal and illegal and if it wasn't for you bleeding heart
> liberal types, it could be met with SWIFT PUNISHMENT..
> >
> > Even theft is not living off of handouts; victims of theft ought to
> >be glad that thieves are trying to provide for themselves.
>
> No they should arm themselves..
>
> Advocating theft as an alternative to welfare is hardly a responsible
> arguement. But nothing much about liberalism is responsible.
LOL! What a perfect parody of the ultra-conservative right wingers!
What accurate dogmatism, what utterly convincing arrogance!
Wait...
You were joking, weren't you?
;)
--
| Andrew Glasgow <amg39(at)cornell.edu> |
| SCSI is *NOT* magic. There are *fundamental technical |
| reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat |
| to your SCSI chain now and then. -- John Woods |
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:57:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ZnU wrote:
> >
> > In article <8rbls4$4a2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "James Stutts"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > "Loren Petrich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:8rb4ll$h19$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, STATIC66
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > >>>> 3. Social Security
> > > > >>>Unconstitutional. END IT NOW.
> > > > >>Based on what ? Your opinion ? The opinions that count, legal
> > > > >>opinions of those better qualified than yourself seem to
> > > > >>contradict this.
> > > > >SOCIALISM
> > > >
> > > > Nowhere does the Constitution mention that word.
> > > >
> > > > >>>> 4. Medicare
> > > > >>>Unconstitutional. END IT NOW.
> > > > >>See above.
> > > > >SOCIALISM
> > > >
> > > > Nowhere does the Constitution mention that word.
> > >
> > > In both cases, it doesn't have to. I suggest you read the 10th
> > > Amendment. If it isn't explicitly stated in the Constitution, the
> > > Congress has no business doing it.
> >
> > Which reads "The powers not delegated to the United States by the
> > Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the
> > States respectively, or to the people."
> >
> > But article 1, section 8 gives Congress the power to, among other
> > things, provide for the "general Welfare of the United States," and the
> > power to make any laws necessary to do so.
>
>
> GENERAL WELFARE... is such things as running a court system, jails,
> etc. I.e. things which benefit society as a whole.
>
>
> AFDC, WIC, Section 8 housing, etc. are INDIVIDUAL WELFARE....which
> only benefits lazy free-loaders.
Maintaining a minimum standard of living for everyone in society
benefits the general welfare.
--
This universe shipped by weight, not volume. Some expansion may have
occurred during shipment.
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 17:01:34 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Richard in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> >> The reason explanatory power is important is because only through
>> >> empirical predictions can the truth of a hypothesis be tested. Science
>> >> is empirical discovery, not a narrative.
>
>> Anything can be predicted, and be right through chance. It is the
>> ability to explain why you predicted it which is the only reason science
>> makes predictions. Science isn't the ability to make predictions [that
>> is theorizing, a component of science], but the ability to explain how
>> you predicted it.
>
>In this paragraph you're saying the exact same thing that I'm saying.
>Is it that in your previous response, it only looked like we disagreed
>because you'd muddled things?
Possible, but unlikely. It does mean, if your able to see in my words
something you can understand, and might agree with, that you're acting
more rationally. Please don't reduce this discussion to insult and
ridicule again, OK?
I believe the similarity of our statements is a result of the fact that
we do agree on the concepts of explanatory power and prediction, and
their distinction. (That in itself might be considered quite a bit to
be satisfied with, considering we're on Usenet.)
I knew all along that I was not disagreeing with your description of the
relationship between the two, but merely exploring it, because I noticed
that a bit of exploration would refute your idea that "the value of
prediction derives entirely from the value of explanation". And yet the
statement you made is true in a very slightly different, yet distinct,
context, so I thought to try to clarify what the 'value of explanation'
is. Perhaps we don't even disagree, after all, but I'm sure you can
find something to dispute in the following statement, which summarizes
my thinking on 'science, explanation, and prediction' in this
discussion:
The value of explanatory power is to provide a prediction which can be
empirically tested. The empirical truth, science, is merely the fact of
the prediction; the explanation of how you predicted it is theory. The
theory is available for revision. This is why I said that science is
empirical discovery, not a narrative, even while it is the explanation,
not the prediction, which is the important part. If you are confused,
it means you're getting close to the idea. You said 'the value of the
prediction is to prove the explanation true', and I pointed out that it
is to test the explanation which is the reason for an experiment, but it
is the prediction which is important to science.
Sorry for the confusion; I hope exploring the concepts of theory and
science might point out why I disagreed with your statement.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
