@# Quotes DB     useful, funny, interesting





Google
 
Web www.quotesdb.info
Undernet  |  EFnet  |  Quakenet  |  Freenode  |  Dalnet  |  Ircnet  |  Galaxynet
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8



Comments:

<0> as i'm working from home today
<0> w00t
<1> peterhu = lazy, as usual
<0> pfft
<2> What's wrong with being lazy
<0> makes you a JBlitzen
<2> I said lazy, not dumb
<2> http://www.despair.com/laziness.html
<1> hehe
<2> http://www.despair.com/daretoslack.html
<2> http://www.despair.com/proc24x30pri.html
<2> Too
<3> success is a journey wow
<4> what's a good name to call a cl*** that encrypts and decrypts using the Rijndael algorithm?
<5> RijndaelCrypter
<5> or cRijndael



<3> nice one Staz
<4> but doesn't that make it seem like it's just for encryption?
<3> a crypter doesn't encrypt or decrypt
<6> Off to office
<7> Does anyone know how to do a "restore" from the recycle bin from a command shell? my brother apparently accidently recycled a file that's required to bring up the GUI
<8> tell him to restore it.
<8> sort of easier.
<7> funny
<7> there's not GUI
<7> he can't SEE the recycle bin
<5> vawAFKhome i think the recyclebin forlder is a hidden folder on the drive
<9> isn't the recycle bin just a special shell folder?
<7> yes, but all the files in it are all renamed
<9> hmf
<5> well... here in the directory : C:\RECYCLER\S-1-5-21-2427090180-2231891924-3928167634-1112 i see all files with their real names, though i'm in Explroer
<7> try it from a command shell
<9> probably easier just to get the file of the windows CD
<9> s/of/off
<5> that's funny... in the root (c:) i type "cd Recycler"... i get the prompt c:\recycler> i type "dir" it sais the folder c:\recycler doesn't exist
<5> okay got it with the absolute path, yeah they're all renamed :-/
<7> it's that loverly?
<10> man, i'm tired
<10> I'll probably be about as productive as peterhu today
<11> http://www.overlawyered.com/2006/06/jurors_award_2_million_in_chil.html
<11> that's a hell of a way to die.
<9> well, if that's actually an accurate summary of the story, there's another one for the crazy lawsuit pile
<7> it's the manufacturers fault, riiiiiiiiight
<9> which is the big problem with jury trials
<9> especially when juries tend to be biased to come from less....successful career paths
<7> well, part of the problem is that people from other thatn "less....successful career paths" keep excusing themselves from jury duty guess what happens
<9> well, it's hard to just take n days/weeks out of your life sometimes
<9> personally, I think it should be mandatory, but you get to pick the date. like army call up
<7> yes it's hard
<9> in that your employer can't fire you for doing it
<7> the company my 1st wife helped start had a policy of NOT writing "excuse" letters and paid regular salary for the duration
<9> a good idea
<7> since the going rate was aroun $5/day for jurors
<7> I helped write the policy and argued for it's existence
<9> judges that perhaps inject more common sense into the proceedings might be a good idea
<9> though that's a tough one as well
<7> of course, government employees all have such poliicies from their work, but the're government employees
<11> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PICKENS_SON?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-06-16-08-19-01
<12> peterhu: http://www.evolutionfairytale.com/articles_debates/mutation_rate.htm
<13> there are too many silly links posted in this channel
<13> I still await the day when someone posts something actually interesting and remotely technical
<13> that is, at the very least
<10> uhhhhhhh
<13> mooo
<13> colour me boring, I suppose
<10> you spell color wrong, too
<10> like a canadian
<0> sigh, i wish just once IRR would site a reference that isn't from a whack job's website
<0> that guy is a nut job creationist that doesn't even attempt to hide his bias, or ignorance
<0> he's an electical engineer who is not qualified to refute any scientific research paper in the biological disciplines
<12> Electrical engineer?
<12> Look. It was a scientific paper. Did you even read it?
<12> was / is
<0> the guy that runs evolutionfairytale.com, the one that wrote that "article"
<0> did *you*?
<12> Its a small article. I read it end to end.
<12> 5 minutes.



<12> And the information theory argument can't be refuted, or misunderstood.
<12> Not by you anyway.
<13> what's the link? I feel like a chuckle or two
<0> http://www.evolutionfairytale.com/articles_debates/mutation_rate.htm
<0> written by an unqualified individual
<0> citing sources out of context
<0> "deriving" equations
<0> it'd be as credible as a paper written by me to *support* evolution
<13> evolutionfairytale.com
<13> bwahaha
<12> Well if you know physics or information theory, you know entropy
<0> yeah, i like the comics
<13> featured in "Creation Digest"
<13> lol
<12> And if you understand entropy, then you understand that evolution is contraire to the universal laws of physics
<0> why do you laugh? it's a serious peer-reviewed scientific journal!
<3> hi
<13> wtf does evolution have to do with information theory or physics
<13> you monkey
<0> IRR: and which law is that? the "i can't comprehend anything that complicated" law?
<12> Cowmoo its something referenced in the paper that this article is refuting.
<12> peterhu which one? Do you know about entropy?
<0> the "laws" you claim evolution is in violation of
<12> entropy
<12> Things proceed from order to disorder
<12> universally.
<13> well wait wait hang on
<12> All things tend to the same energy level
<13> IRR I apologise, I thought this was talking about evolution in general, as opposed to ape -> man
<0> Cowmoo: it doesn't matter what it talks about
<13> but the source is still suspect
<12> Whatever. Its a well argued article. If I read a well argued work on evolution I give it the respect it deserves.
<0> it's not only suspect, but clearly unusable for supporting any argument
<13> peterhu I thought ape->man evolution is still being contested?
<0> Cowmoo: i'm sure it is
<0> that's the joy of science
<13> well I meant
<12> If you are following a wrong line of reasoning, that doesn't mean you are stupid.
<12> It happens all the time in research.
<13> the evidence so far isn't as strong as for the rest of the creatures
<13> that whole "missing link" business
<3> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9fjMS0by-w&search=ninja%20physics
<0> IRR: perhaps; but stupidity is the requisite for falling back on one's religious beliefs to explain the universe
<12> Has anyone read 'The Dreaming of Dragons' by that australian Scifi writer
<13> the problem is that I'm not an expert in evolutionary biology, so I can't comment too much on the actual writing
<13> but the sources are enough to rouse suspicion, at least
<0> damn it cowmoo
<0> i was going to use you as a reference
<12> peterhu as far as I am concerned, in IT/CS, my work/research doesn't have anything to do with who created the universe.
<13> urghghghgh
<13> don't say IT/CS
<12> So maybe I don't feel the dilemma you do, although you work in the same general area.
<13> don't bring the IT word in
<13> me as a reference? for what
<0> what dilemma?
<0> cowmoo: for proving evollution
<12> Big bang, evolution or not, it doesn't concern my beliefs in my core domain.
<0> -l
<13> is that supposed to be an insult? I don't know how to retort
<12> If I were an astro physicist or a biologist, then it would maybe.
<0> no, it was supposed to be a remark on IRR supporting his beliefs with ignorant resources, but you're too dumb a moo to get it
<12> So, I don't NEED to fall back to my religious beliefs when I am analysing something scientific.
<13> I'm playing with Lisp now, leave me alone
<13> IRR
<0> see, you omanis do live in caves if you're playing with lisp
<12> Because for me, scientific doesn't correspond to the areas contested by evolutions vs. creationists.
<13> do you realise that this source is rather suspect
<12> what source
<0> fred williams
<13> and that your argument is only hurt by supporting it using something called evolutionfairytale.com
<12> What if you read an evolutionist article on creationismfairytale.com, if it exists.
<12> Then you'll be more tolerant.
<13> featured in "Creation Digest"
<12> You speak of science and rationalism, but you start out with a bias.


Name:

Comments:

Please enter the result of the sum 63 + 46 (to avoid spam):






Return to #c++
or
Go to some related logs:

tedi nick
#linuxhelp
#apache
VEN_11C1
gettimeofday win32 queryperformancecounter
#AllNiteCafe
videolan alsa capture audio
#skype
#linuxhelp
Optiplex GX110 standby linux



Home  |  disclaimer  |  contact  |  submit quotes