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

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #12727

Re: magic number for mcrypt

Show all headers | View raw

On 2014-11-17, Bill Cunningham <nospam@nspam.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> Let me explain, from the mentioned list site and notice what is in 
> parenthesis.
>
> "Spell, punctuate, and capitalize correctly. Don't confuse "its" with "it's", 
> "loose" with "lose", or "discrete" with "discreet". Don't TYPE IN ALL CAPS; 
> this is read as shouting and considered rude. (All-smalls is only slightly 
> less annoying, as it's difficult to read. Alan Cox can get away with it, but 
> you can't.)"

The first is standard practice if you want to be read and understood by
people. It makes more work for them trying to disentable your meaning if
you do not follow conventions. 

>
>     "Alan Cox can get away with it, but you can't" That suggests to me there 
> are two groups. "Alan Cox" and "you". A programmer and non-programmer. 
> Programmers look down on non-programmers. Hence usenet becomes a "social 
> group" for programmers. Any help one gets is by pure chance.

If someone  has a long history of being helpful, people are willing to
put up with his peculiarities because they get far more out of him then
they lose by having to disentagle his phrases. Ie, if you are a stranger
and you come in with bad spelling, and are asking for help, people are
going to be much less tolerant of you, since they are pretty sure that
not only will it cost them in trying to figure out what you are going to
say, but also in the effort to try to help you. It also tends very
roughly to be true that people with loads of spelling mistakes and lots
of use of capitals are also the ones that get obnoxious very quickly
when you try to help them. Not always. Sometimes that drunk in the bar
whose every second word is "fuck" turns out to be the most insightful
person there. But rarely. It is a cost-benefit
analysis, and if you want help, it is important to skew that as much in
your own favour as you possibly can. 

>
>     I have been around usenet for a while. It has been suggested by others 
> to get programming books. I have some. I had no where to turn one time and 
> came to usenet. I explained to the same people who suggested books the 
> problem, they said that the books were wrong and I needed to ignore them. I 
> am not sure whether someone was "messing" with me or what. But I didn't get 
> any help there.

It happens. Yes, occasionally books are wrong. Or it can be very
difficult to find the right section. Asking on usenet is fine. And yes,
you may get some people answering who either do not know what they are
talking about. You have to learn how to filter. Remember usenet is like
a pub on Fri night. Some conversations are brilliant, helpful, and make
you smarter, some are obnoxious, opinionated and wrong. I would say
usenet is closer to the former than the latter, but not entirely. 

>
>     Because the "rules" or "suggestions" whatever they are are almost 
> excluding usenet. Usenet "intrinsically" is cutting its' own throat.  I say 

??? You think usenet is some monolithic organisation like say Microsoft?
There is not throat to cut. It is a random bunch of people getting
together to talk and sometimes to help each other. Yes, some people are
there only to snipe, to display their own ignorance, to be a pain in the
neck, just like your corner pub. 

If you want to pay some consultant $100/hr to answer your questions you
can. If you want to interact with people whose expertise is far far
greater than anyone you could get for $100/hr, come to usenet, but the
cost is that you must discriminate between them and the others whose
advice is worth minus $100/hr. (Ie that is what you would pay not to
have to listen to them). Many of us think the tradeoff is worth it. If
you do not, don't come to usenet. 


> if Alan Cox is excluded from things others aren't then my proposition is 
> that there is indeed "Innies" and "Outties". It is also says to not say 

Of course there are. That drunk who always comes over to you and tells
you his life story, or his latest uninformed opinions will get a lot
less attention from you in the bar than your friend who always helps you.

> certain things to people in the site mentioned. "Seniors" are to do this? 
> That is a pack. A group. I see no non-sequitors here. Let me know if you do.

I see a bunch of incoherent sentence fragments. 

>
>     This is also a warning to those new to usenet. about Usenet. Or USENET. 
> Oops, I guess I shouted. The leader needs to make a decision.

What leader? You have entirely the wrong image of what Usenet is. 

Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

magic number for mcrypt "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-11-15 18:30 -0500
  Re: magic number for mcrypt Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> - 2014-11-15 18:27 -0800
    Re: magic number for mcrypt "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-11-15 21:54 -0500
      Re: magic number for mcrypt Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> - 2014-11-15 19:02 -0800
        Re: magic number for mcrypt Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> - 2014-11-15 19:08 -0800
          Re: magic number for mcrypt gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-11-16 06:52 +0000
            Re: magic number for mcrypt Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> - 2014-11-16 01:10 -0800
          Re: magic number for mcrypt "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-11-16 14:01 -0500
            Re: magic number for mcrypt Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2014-11-16 11:56 -0800
              Re: magic number for mcrypt Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2014-11-18 03:50 +0000
                Re: magic number for mcrypt "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-11-17 23:56 -0500
            Re: magic number for mcrypt "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-11-16 15:34 -0500
              Re: magic number for mcrypt William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2014-11-16 22:16 +0000
                Re: magic number for mcrypt "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-11-17 16:47 -0500
                Re: magic number for mcrypt William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2014-11-17 23:43 +0000
                Re: magic number for mcrypt Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-11-18 00:36 +0000
                Re: magic number for mcrypt "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-11-17 23:02 -0500
              Re: magic number for mcrypt Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2014-11-16 17:39 -0800
                Re: magic number for mcrypt "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-11-17 16:22 -0500
        Re: magic number for mcrypt "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-11-16 13:59 -0500

csiph-web