[109492] in Cypherpunks
Re: CDR: Re: About Alpha radiation... (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Snow Crash)
Thu Mar 25 22:45:41 1999
In-Reply-To: <199903252348.RAA14274@einstein.ssz.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 21:33:00 -0600
To: cypherpunks@einstein.ssz.com
From: Snow Crash <snow@smoke.suba.com>
Reply-To: Snow Crash <snow@smoke.suba.com>
Jim:
>----- Forwarded message from Lucky Green -----
>I wasn't referring to long-term charge storage. Sigh. I guess my post did
>not do much good, since the first reply to it totally ingored the main
>thrust in it, namely that statements about phenomena not truly understood
>by an author are often wrong and that textbook explanations are frequenly
>simplified and thus may not suffice in analyzing non-standard scenarios.
>
>One would have hoped the reader to pause for a moment before attacking
>an example specifically chosen for its complexity and marked as such.
>
>----- End of forwarded message from Lucky Green -----
>
>Then you should be more careful about the way you word your statements.
>
>One could say that since your original statement was incomplete and left out
>important boundary conditions would imply you didn't understand it any
>better than the original poster or the textbook authors.
>
>The reader would hope the examples were complete and clearly deliniated
>their boundary conditions so the reader was better able to understand the
>limitations themselves and apply them more effectively.
Were you laying on the floor when you read this, or did you duck?
In the future, I'd suggest you read this list standing up so things
don't go completely over your head.
HE WASN'T TALKING ABOUT DRAM, he was talking about how often
introductory texts don't tell you the whole story, how they simplify things
so that idiots can understand them.
Geez Jim, you aren't stupid, why do you act so dense?
--
Five seconds later, I'm getting the upside of 15Kv across the nipples.
(These ambulance guys sure know how to party).
The Ideal we strive for: http://www.iinet.net.au/~bofh/bofh/bofh11.html
