Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #31184 > unrolled thread

My way of defining what's invention ...

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  My way of defining what's invention ... Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2015-02-22 18:38 -0800
    Re: My way of defining what's invention ... Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-02-22 21:01 -0500
    Re: My way of defining what's invention ... Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2015-02-23 10:52 +0100
    Re: My way of defining what's invention ... Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2015-02-23 11:39 +0100
    Re: My way of defining what's invention ... Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2015-02-23 12:12 +0100
      Re: My way of defining what's invention ... Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2015-02-23 12:26 +0100
        Re: My way of defining what's invention ... Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-02-23 12:17 +0000

#31184 — My way of defining what's invention ...

Jerry Stuckle wrote to me:

 >You didn't invent crap.  All you did was implement already developed
 >algorithms.  Something any programmer does every day.
 >All you're doing is making yourself look even more stupid.


You are a kind of stupid guy too..

Because you have to define what's an invention...

You are defining an invention as one that must have a quality of 9/10 or 
10/10 and you are taking into account  the criteria of "difficulty" an 
the "size" of the invention, you are saying that an invention that is 
not of a big size or/and of a degree of difficulty that is high is not 
an invention, but your way of defining invention is a sadistic way of 
defining what's an invention.


My inventions that i have talked before are inventions too, but
you have to have more "wisdom" to agree with me, you are a low
level person when it comes to the criteria of "wisdom".



Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#31188

On 2/22/2015 9:38 PM, Ramine wrote:
> 
> Jerry Stuckle wrote to me:
> 
>>You didn't invent crap.  All you did was implement already developed
>>algorithms.  Something any programmer does every day.
>>All you're doing is making yourself look even more stupid.
> 
> 
> You are a kind of stupid guy too..
> 
> Because you have to define what's an invention...
> 
> You are defining an invention as one that must have a quality of 9/10 or
> 10/10 and you are taking into account  the criteria of "difficulty" an
> the "size" of the invention, you are saying that an invention that is
> not of a big size or/and of a degree of difficulty that is high is not
> an invention, but your way of defining invention is a sadistic way of
> defining what's an invention.
> 
> 
> My inventions that i have talked before are inventions too, but
> you have to have more "wisdom" to agree with me, you are a low
> level person when it comes to the criteria of "wisdom".
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you,
> Amine Moulay Ramdane.
> 
> 

You obviously are completely clueless.  And even more stupid than I
first thought.

How old are you?  14?  15?  How long have you been programming? Six
months?  A year?

That's how you act, anyway.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31191

On 02/23/2015 03:38 AM, Ramine wrote:
>
> Jerry Stuckle wrote to me:
>
>  >You didn't invent crap.  All you did was implement already developed
>  >algorithms.  Something any programmer does every day.
>  >All you're doing is making yourself look even more stupid.
>
>
> You are a kind of stupid guy too..
>
> Because you have to define what's an invention...
>
> You are defining an invention as one that must have a quality of 9/10 or
> 10/10 and you are taking into account  the criteria of "difficulty" an
> the "size" of the invention, you are saying that an invention that is
> not of a big size or/and of a degree of difficulty that is high is not
> an invention, but your way of defining invention is a sadistic way of
> defining what's an invention.
>
>
> My inventions that i have talked before are inventions too, but
> you have to have more "wisdom" to agree with me, you are a low
> level person when it comes to the criteria of "wisdom".
>
>
>
> Thank you,
> Amine Moulay Ramdane.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

To invent something means that you have come up with a completely new 
and conceptually unique method of achieving something. It is about 
revolutionary versus evolutionary.

If you are adapting or extending existing ideas or even combining 
multiple existing concepts then you have not invented anything. You may 
be the first one to ever do that particular thing and may have been very 
smart doing so but that is what programmers do every day all over the world.

A revolutionary new sorting algorithm? A revolutionary new concept of 
implementing an auto-balancing tree structure? Sure, those might deserve 
to be called inventions. But if they are in any way improvements or 
extensions to existing ideas then they don't.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31192

On 02/23/2015 03:38 AM, Ramine wrote:
>
> Jerry Stuckle wrote to me:
>
>  >You didn't invent crap.  All you did was implement already developed
>  >algorithms.  Something any programmer does every day.
>  >All you're doing is making yourself look even more stupid.
>
>
> You are a kind of stupid guy too..
>
> Because you have to define what's an invention...
>
> You are defining an invention as one that must have a quality of 9/10 or
> 10/10 and you are taking into account  the criteria of "difficulty" an
> the "size" of the invention, you are saying that an invention that is
> not of a big size or/and of a degree of difficulty that is high is not
> an invention, but your way of defining invention is a sadistic way of
> defining what's an invention.
>
>
> My inventions that i have talked before are inventions too, but
> you have to have more "wisdom" to agree with me, you are a low
> level person when it comes to the criteria of "wisdom".
>
>
>
> Thank you,
> Amine Moulay Ramdane.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

One final piece of well meant advice: if you have not mastered the 
English language at a higher level than what your posts demonstrate then 
you should stay away from such semantic discussions. Your line of 
thinking may be correct but your write-up of your ideas can still be 
completely wrong.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31193

I've just invented QuickSort, and yesterday I invented MapReduce before
inventing Strings.

I define 'inventing' as writing the algorithms down with a yellow pen, and
you are all too stupid to understand how right I am.

Liebe Gruesse,
		Joerg

-- 
Ich lese meine Emails nicht, replies to Email bleiben also leider
ungelesen.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31194

On 02/23/2015 12:12 PM, Joerg Meier wrote:
> I've just invented QuickSort, and yesterday I invented MapReduce before
> inventing Strings.
>
> I define 'inventing' as writing the algorithms down with a yellow pen, and
> you are all too stupid to understand how right I am.
>
> Liebe Gruesse,
> 		Joerg
>

Can we still keep using these things please? Or do we have to pay 
royalties from now on?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#31195

On Mon, 23 Feb 2015 12:26:56 +0100, Silvio wrote:

> On 02/23/2015 12:12 PM, Joerg Meier wrote:
>> I've just invented QuickSort, and yesterday I invented MapReduce before
>> inventing Strings.
>>
>> I define 'inventing' as writing the algorithms down with a yellow pen,
>> and you are all too stupid to understand how right I am.
>>
>> Liebe Gruesse,
>> 		Joerg
>>
>>
> Can we still keep using these things please? Or do we have to pay
> royalties from now on?

You're OK unless your editor displays yellow text or your printing card 
punch uses a yellow ribbon.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web