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

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #93793 > unrolled thread

Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI

Started byLeroy H <lh@somewhere.net>
First post2026-10-16 03:26 +0000
Last post2026-10-18 10:59 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 246 — 22 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 03:26 +0000
    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 00:00 -0400
      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 04:33 +0000
      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-15 21:53 -0700
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 01:31 -0400
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 06:08 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 04:39 -0400
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 08:49 +0000
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 08:53 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 05:26 -0400
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:29 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:31 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:16 +0000
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:42 -0400
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:44 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:55 +0100
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:20 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:20 +0100
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:09 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 12:54 +0100
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:15 +0000
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 15:05 +0100
                          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 14:54 +0000
                            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 16:46 +0100
                              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 16:57 +0000
                              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 19:01 +0000
                                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:11 +0100
                                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 14:48 -0700
                                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Harold Stevens <wookie@bookworm.localdomain> - 2026-10-17 08:26 -0500
                                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 15:01 +0100
                                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 22:11 +0000
                                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 08:52 +0000
                                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:30 +0100
                                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:17 +0200
                                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 02:30 +0000
                                          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:54 +0100
                                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 04:32 -0400
                                          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:30 +0200
                                            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:13 +0100
                                              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 14:19 +0200
                                                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:38 +0100
                                                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 15:10 +0200
                                                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:58 +0100
                                                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 16:04 +0200
                                                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 15:33 +0200
                                                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 14:23 +0000
                                                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 13:00 +0000
                                                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 15:12 +0200
                                                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 13:26 +0000
                                                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 15:35 +0200
                                                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 14:04 +0000
                                                          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 16:24 +0200
                                                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:50 +0100
                                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:39 +0000
                                          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:58 -0400
                                          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:55 +0100
                                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:43 +0100
                                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:19 +0000
                                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 03:48 +0000
                                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
                                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 02:20 +0000
                                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-17 06:37 -0400
                                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:59 +0100
                                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
                                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:20 +0200
                                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:50 +0000
                                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:48 +0100
                                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:25 +0200
                          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:15 +0200
                            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:36 +0100
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 14:57 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-15 23:16 -0700
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 07:45 +0000
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-16 08:41 -0700
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 18:27 +0100
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 21:55 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 23:43 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:31 +0200
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:00 -0400
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 03:56 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:09 +0100
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:58 +0100
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 13:33 +0200
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:08 +0100
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 13:13 -0700
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:27 +0100
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 14:50 -0700
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 04:15 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 04:41 -0400
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:00 +0100
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:57 +0100
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:26 +0100
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:42 +0000
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 10:56 +0100
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:14 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 13:07 +0100
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:20 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 15:26 +0100
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:32 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:21 +0100
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 04:04 +0000
                          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:24 +0100
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:27 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:20 +0100
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 01:13 +0100
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 02:32 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 03:04 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:41 +0100
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:45 +0200
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:24 +0000
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:16 +0100
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:53 +0200
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 06:02 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Peyton" <peyton@solacium.us> - 2026-10-15 23:26 -0700
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 06:42 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 07:41 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 06:39 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 04:22 -0400
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 10:54 +0100
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:19 +0100
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 08:40 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:52 +0100
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:47 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-10-17 23:29 +0200
      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 05:29 +0000
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 10:07 +0100
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 09:28 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:26 +0100
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 10:56 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 12:40 +0100
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:46 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 13:39 +0100
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:48 +0000
      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 09:16 +0100
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 08:51 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 11:04 +0100
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 11:13 +0000
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 13:03 +0100
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:26 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-16 15:21 +0100
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 15:07 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-16 21:26 -0400
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 01:55 +0000
                          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-17 01:07 -0400
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:28 +0100
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-16 12:35 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:09 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-10-16 16:37 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-16 19:51 +0000
    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 11:44 -0400
      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 16:14 +0000
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-16 17:10 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 17:56 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-16 18:10 +0000
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-16 18:32 +0000
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 21:52 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-16 22:19 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 02:28 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-17 01:52 -0400
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:11 +0100
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-16 21:50 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:39 -0400
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 09:43 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 15:02 +0100
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 15:06 +0100
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:15 +0100
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 19:55 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:38 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:08 +0100
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 19:51 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 17:36 +0200
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:12 +0100
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:05 +0000
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 22:35 +0200
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 09:12 +0100
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 16:46 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 19:01 +0200
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 19:08 +0200
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:07 +0100
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:22 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:29 +0100
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:33 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:09 +0100
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:42 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 01:54 +0000
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:11 +0200
                          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:38 +0200
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:33 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 19:42 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:36 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-17 15:47 -0600
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 23:11 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-17 18:07 -0600
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 03:05 +0000
                        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 09:57 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 02:49 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 12:14 +0200
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-17 07:20 +0000
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 07:43 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-17 12:17 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:18 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 08:16 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:18 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 04:47 -0400
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 17:26 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-17 19:47 +0200
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 07:25 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 18:45 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 20:26 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:50 +0000
                      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-17 22:51 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 04:58 -0400
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 07:43 +0000
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:15 +0100
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 07:13 +0000
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:14 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 08:01 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:55 -0400
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 14:09 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:12 +0100
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 02:42 -0400
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 08:53 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-18 05:06 -0400
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:32 +0000
                  Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:20 +0100
                    Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-18 13:22 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:36 -0400
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-16 19:35 -0400
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 09:18 +0100
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-10-17 06:32 -0400
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:55 +0100
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 12:12 +0000
                Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 13:43 +0100
              Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:37 +0000
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 09:07 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-17 13:30 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-17 20:08 +0000
            Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:04 +0100
      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nick Charles <none@none.none> - 2026-10-16 23:19 +0000
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-17 02:29 +0000
          Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-17 01:54 -0400
      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-17 08:58 +0000
        Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-17 11:25 +0100
      Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "De ongekruisigde ds." <ongekruisigde-ds@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 10:59 +0000

Page 5 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 13  Next page →

#94128

FromNuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-18 11:09 +0100
Message-ID<11b25t1$10nek$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93935
On 2026-10-16, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 08:41:34 -0700, Peyton wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2026 23:16:46 -0700, Peyton wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'd argue knowing the difference between compiled and interpreted
>>>> is basic CS.
>>>
>>> Knowing that the difference is even less significant than you might
>>> think is even more basic CS.
>>>
>> Gee, I guess saving both hours of time and money is pretty
>> insignificant.
>
> Remember when JavaScript running in the browser was considered too
> slow for anything involving advanced interactivity? Yet now we have
> entire apps, as complex as anything you might run stand-alone on the
> desktop, implemented entirely in the browser?
>
> How did that come about? Is your browser running a JavaScript
> compiler, or a JavaScript interpreter? It’s really kind of a mixture
> of both, isn’t it?

It mainly happened through high-end devices being available to many
webdevs, and with concerns about portability and accessibility being
easier to disregard.

The code is still slow and heavy, some things may have become more
efficient, but that's arguably largely offset by many more additions to
what's usually done in these webapps.

But yeah, the distinction between "compiled" and "interpreted" doesn't
imply anything about performance, and it's completely possible for a
language implementation with some sort of compilation to perform
terribly (see e.g. CPython).

-- 
Nuno Silva

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

#94142

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-18 11:58 +0100
Message-ID<11b28nt$11pis$8@dont-email.me>
In reply to#94128
On 18/10/2026 11:09, Nuno Silva wrote:
> But yeah, the distinction between "compiled" and "interpreted" doesn't
> imply anything about performance, and it's completely possible for a
> language implementation with some sort of compilation to perform
> terribly (see e.g. CPython).

Apocryphally Gary Kildall was called upon to fix some industrial 
assembler while on a vacation job.

He rewrite in  Fortran, It ran ten times faster.

faster instructions are no substitute for shitty algorithms

-- 
I would rather have questions that cannot be answered...
...than to have answers that cannot be questioned

Richard Feynman

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

#94155

FromJohn Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com>
Date2026-10-18 13:33 +0200
Message-ID<11b2apq$134sq$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#94142
On 18/10/2026 12:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 18/10/2026 11:09, Nuno Silva wrote:
>> But yeah, the distinction between "compiled" and "interpreted" doesn't
>> imply anything about performance, and it's completely possible for a
>> language implementation with some sort of compilation to perform
>> terribly (see e.g. CPython).
> 
> Apocryphally Gary Kildall was called upon to fix some industrial 
> assembler while on a vacation job.
> 
> He rewrite in  Fortran, It ran ten times faster.
> 
> faster instructions are no substitute for shitty algorithms

I once was asked to improve on a search on a website. They had forgotten 
to add an index to a very important column. From minutes to seconds :-D.

-- 
Static tumblelog generator: https://github.com/john-bokma/tumblelog/
Available as Python or Perl. Example tumblelog: https://plurrrr.com/

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

#94164

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-18 13:08 +0100
Message-ID<11b2cs4$11pis$23@dont-email.me>
In reply to#94155
On 18/10/2026 12:33, John Bokma wrote:
> On 18/10/2026 12:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 18/10/2026 11:09, Nuno Silva wrote:
>>> But yeah, the distinction between "compiled" and "interpreted" doesn't
>>> imply anything about performance, and it's completely possible for a
>>> language implementation with some sort of compilation to perform
>>> terribly (see e.g. CPython).
>>
>> Apocryphally Gary Kildall was called upon to fix some industrial 
>> assembler while on a vacation job.
>>
>> He rewrite in  Fortran, It ran ten times faster.
>>
>> faster instructions are no substitute for shitty algorithms
> 
> I once was asked to improve on a search on a website. They had forgotten 
> to add an index to a very important column. From minutes to seconds :-D.
> 
Oh yes.

I played around with mysql a fair bit a decade ago. For write rarely 
read often indices are a must


-- 
"First, find out who are the people you can not criticise. They are your 
oppressors."
      - George Orwell

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

#93919

FromJohn Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com>
Date2026-10-16 13:13 -0700
Message-ID<20261016131327.00002892@gmail.com>
In reply to#93809
On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 07:45:44 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> > I'd argue knowing the difference between compiled and interpreted is
> > basic CS.  
> 
> Knowing that the difference is even less significant than you might
> think is even more basic CS.
> 
> After all, where does “hardware” end and “software” begin? On which
> side of the line do you place things like “firmware” (note the name)
> and “microcode”? The “P” in “PLA” stands for “programmable”; does
> that mean the gate connections are still “hardware”, or not?

That's an inane thing to say when we're talking about software from the
CPU's perspective. "Firmware" is software; the fact that it's stored in
non-volatile memory doesn't change that. PLAs being programmable in
their own right has no bearing on their use in implementing what is, to
the CPU, definitely *not* software. The only term that actually blurs
the lines here is microcode; this can indeed be seen as another layer
for programmatically directing the operations of hardware, even if it's
only used to implement the machine's official instruction set. But then
not all CPUs are actually microcoded in the first place.

And all of this has precious little to do with the difference between
compiled and interpreted languages from an application/OS perspective.
Whether a CPU is microcoded or not makes no difference to the fact that
its native instruction set is the most elemental group of *available*
operations for software running on it.

Compiled languages by definition translate their own fundamental
language operations into sequences of native instructions (ideally with
a compiler that optimizes them at compile time.) Interpreted languages,
by the classical definition, do not, and the overhead of running the
interpreter along with the actual program causes performance penalties
which may be anything from moderate to severe.

There are also other strategies - compiling to "pseudocode" operations
targeting a virtual-machine architecture that's lower-level than the
source language (which has a lower overhead than classical interpreters
and is useful for portability) or just-in-time compilation (which is
more performant than a pure interpreter, but has a higher memory over-
head) - and all of these have their own upsides and downsides. Claiming
that the distinction is of minimal significance is, frankly, absurd.

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

#93928

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-16 22:27 +0100
Message-ID<11au4sj$3k12p$18@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93919
On 16/10/2026 21:13, John Ames wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 07:45:44 -0000 (UTC)
> Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>> I'd argue knowing the difference between compiled and interpreted is
>>> basic CS.
>>
>> Knowing that the difference is even less significant than you might
>> think is even more basic CS.
>>
>> After all, where does “hardware” end and “software” begin? On which
>> side of the line do you place things like “firmware” (note the name)
>> and “microcode”? The “P” in “PLA” stands for “programmable”; does
>> that mean the gate connections are still “hardware”, or not?
> 
> That's an inane thing to say when we're talking about software from the
> CPU's perspective. "Firmware" is software; the fact that it's stored in
> non-volatile memory doesn't change that. PLAs being programmable in
> their own right has no bearing on their use in implementing what is, to
> the CPU, definitely *not* software. The only term that actually blurs
> the lines here is microcode; this can indeed be seen as another layer
> for programmatically directing the operations of hardware, even if it's
> only used to implement the machine's official instruction set. But then
> not all CPUs are actually microcoded in the first place.
> 
Every single *86 processor is.

Traditional simpler ARM cores use hardwired control logic, while modern 
high-performance ARM cores (like Apple Silicon and Cortex-X) use 
internal micro-operation (µop) translation layers



> And all of this has precious little to do with the difference between
> compiled and interpreted languages from an application/OS perspective.
Well anyone can change the question to make their answer fit

> Whether a CPU is microcoded or not makes no difference to the fact that
> its native instruction set is the most elemental group of *available*
> operations for software running on it.
> 
Not if its microcode is held off chip or can be flashed onto NVram in 
the chip

Intel microcode is reprogrammable. While the base microcode is 
permanently baked into the processor's Read-Only Memory (ROM) during 
manufacturing, Intel CPUs feature a mechanism that allows this code to 
be patched or overwritten dynamically.


> Compiled languages by definition translate their own fundamental
> language operations into sequences of native instructions (ideally with
> a compiler that optimizes them at compile time.) Interpreted languages,
> by the classical definition, do not, and the overhead of running the
> interpreter along with the actual program causes performance penalties
> which may be anything from moderate to severe.
> 
Golly. whoda thunk it?

> There are also other strategies - compiling to "pseudocode" operations
> targeting a virtual-machine architecture that's lower-level than the
> source language (which has a lower overhead than classical interpreters
> and is useful for portability) or just-in-time compilation (which is
> more performant than a pure interpreter, but has a higher memory over-
> head) - and all of these have their own upsides and downsides. Claiming
> that the distinction is of minimal significance is, frankly, absurd.
> 
I cant work out who you think this might be news to.

-- 
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

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

#93933

FromJohn Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com>
Date2026-10-16 14:50 -0700
Message-ID<20261016145021.00005f03@gmail.com>
In reply to#93928
On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 22:27:47 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> I cant work out who you think this might be news to.

You probably could if you noted whom that reply was directed at.

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

#93968

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2026-10-17 04:15 +0000
Message-ID<njgb2lFit4rU36@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#93919
On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 13:13:27 -0700, John Ames wrote:

> The only term that actually blurs the lines here is microcode; this can
> indeed be seen as another layer for programmatically directing the
> operations of hardware, even if it's only used to implement the
> machine's official instruction set. But then not all CPUs are actually
> microcoded in the first place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PALM_processor

IBM had a strange idea of what a microprocessor was. The System/23 was the 
successor to the 5100 series and used an Intel 8085 and other Intel MPUs.

I found it odd that the IBM PC was a 5150. It had nothing to do with the 
5100 - 5120 machines.

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

#93815

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-10-16 04:41 -0400
Message-ID<m-Sdnd5rWbe-fkz3nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#93804
On 10/16/26 02:16, Peyton wrote:
> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
> 
>> On 10/16/26 00:53, Peyton wrote:
>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 10/15/26 23:26, Leroy H wrote:
>>>>> It is amazing how knowledge of basic CS is absent in most
>>>>> programmers, both professional and amateur alike.  While
>>>>> "vibe coding" is all the rage, a silent disaster is also
>>>>> creeping.
>>>>
>>>>     99+ percent of us got by just fine without
>>>>     any "computer science" crapola.
>>>>
>>>>     CS is all math/stats. Has almost nothing to
>>>>     do with the real-world these days. Maybe in
>>>>     the 1940s .......
>>>>
>>>>     Might, MAYBE, produce a useful idea, every,
>>>>     very, once in awhile.
>>>>
>>> I one time worked with a colleague who did not understand why a C#
>>> binary executable was running significantly faster than a Python
>>> script.
>>
>>    Worrisome.
>>
>>    However do note that MOST of the Python functions
>>    are writ in 'C'.
>>
> 
>>> Not having basic CS fundamentals does have real implications in
>>> everyday software.
>>
>>    Not so much.
>>
> When you don't know the basics you'll make some bone headed
> decisions that'll impact efficiency and/or correctness. 

   You are confusing 'CS' with simple, theory-free,
   knowledge about programming. You can't really get
   that from a book.

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

#93840

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-16 11:00 +0100
Message-ID<11assj3$33n8m$21@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93815
On 16/10/2026 09:41, c186282 wrote:
> You are confusing 'CS' with simple, theory-free,
>    knowledge about programming. You can't really get
>    that from a book.

You can. Its just not a CS book

Years later after having been a programmer and running a tech company I 
happened to drift into a technical bookshop in search of something 
specific to do with Sys5 unix as implemented by Sun (solaris?)

I skimmed through a book on 'software engineering'

Almost everything I had learnt the hard way was in that damned book,. 
About 15 years too late...


-- 
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace, 
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

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

#93821

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-16 09:57 +0100
Message-ID<11asosu$33n8m$9@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93804
On 16/10/2026 07:16, Peyton wrote:
> I agree. That is the very issue. I'd argue knowing the difference between
> compiled and interpreted is basic CS.

Only if by CS you mean 'common sense'

I certainly do not think that is what a CS course is all about.

It is probably fundamental to software engineering though.


-- 
Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.

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

#93813

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-16 09:26 +0100
Message-ID<11asn32$33n8m$7@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93801
On 16/10/2026 06:31, c186282 wrote:
> Yer guy didn't need a CS degree - just someone
>    to TELL him the diff between compiled and
>    interpreted. That's all.

Precisely. Just count the cycles
Ive told this story before, so apologies,

The lads were preparing to lift the engine out of IIRC a fork lift truck 
using a chain hoist strapped to a wooden beam or rather insubstantial 
proportions. I stopped them :
"We ought to calculate if that beam can take it"
"Don't worry, it can"
"How do you know"
"Because we used it to pull a bigger motor out last week when you 
weren't looking"

In nearly all my time as an engineer, you only uses the theory to design 
something that's never been designed before.

In all other cases it's quicker and more fool proof to simply knock up a 
prototype and test it.

And that can be done by far less expensive people than a theoretician


-- 
WOKE is an acronym... Without Originality, Knowledge or Education.

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

#93833

FromTapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com>
Date2026-10-16 09:42 +0000
Message-ID<11asri6$31lan$10@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93813
On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 09:26:10 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


> The lads were preparing to lift the engine out of IIRC a fork lift truck
> using a chain hoist strapped to a wooden beam or rather insubstantial
> proportions. I stopped them :
> "We ought to calculate if that beam can take it"
> "Don't worry, it can"
> "How do you know"
> "Because we used it to pull a bigger motor out last week when you
> weren't looking"

Ah: you reduced the problem to a known one with known complexity in order 
to derive an upper bound! :o)

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

#93839

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-16 10:56 +0100
Message-ID<11assbv$33n8m$20@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93833
On 16/10/2026 10:42, Tapiro Ubriaco wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 09:26:10 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
> 
>> The lads were preparing to lift the engine out of IIRC a fork lift truck
>> using a chain hoist strapped to a wooden beam or rather insubstantial
>> proportions. I stopped them :
>> "We ought to calculate if that beam can take it"
>> "Don't worry, it can"
>> "How do you know"
>> "Because we used it to pull a bigger motor out last week when you
>> weren't looking"
> 
> Ah: you reduced the problem to a known one with known complexity in order
> to derive an upper bound! :o)

Typical CS remark :-)

No, we safely pulled a motor out of a forklift truck.

The guy doing it was a great guy, Trained as a diesel fitter. Proper 
engineer of the old school sort.


-- 
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

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

#93849

FromTapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com>
Date2026-10-16 11:14 +0000
Message-ID<11at0uk$31lan$15@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93839
On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 10:56:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


>> Ah: you reduced the problem to a known one with known complexity in
>> order to derive an upper bound! :o)
> 
> Typical CS remark
> 
> No, we safely pulled a motor out of a forklift truck.
> 
> The guy doing it was a great guy, Trained as a diesel fitter. Proper
> engineer of the old school sort.

Mh, this reminds me that I will never wrap my head around the fact that 
English uses the same word ("engineer") for a person who works with a 
slide rule and a pencil and a person who works with a wrench.

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

#93856

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-16 13:07 +0100
Message-ID<11at41q$33n8m$38@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93849
On 16/10/2026 12:14, Tapiro Ubriaco wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 10:56:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
> 
>>> Ah: you reduced the problem to a known one with known complexity in
>>> order to derive an upper bound! :o)
>>
>> Typical CS remark
>>
>> No, we safely pulled a motor out of a forklift truck.
>>
>> The guy doing it was a great guy, Trained as a diesel fitter. Proper
>> engineer of the old school sort.
> 
> Mh, this reminds me that I will never wrap my head around the fact that
> English uses the same word ("engineer") for a person who works with a
> slide rule and a pencil and a person who works with a wrench.

There is very little difference. Only in degree.
That why the English are the best engineers in the world. They can work 
a slide rule AND a torque wrench

There is a lot of theory to being a diesel fitter. As well as knowing 
how to undo a rusty bolt

They are not just 'technicians'



-- 
How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.

Adolf Hitler

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

#93859

FromTapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com>
Date2026-10-16 12:20 +0000
Message-ID<11at4q0$31lan$19@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93856
On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 13:07:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>> Mh, this reminds me that I will never wrap my head around the fact that
>> English uses the same word ("engineer") for a person who works with a
>> slide rule and a pencil and a person who works with a wrench.
> 
> There is very little difference. Only in degree.
> That why the English are the best engineers in the world.

Not to mention the best cuisine.

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

#93870

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-16 15:26 +0100
Message-ID<11atc6j$3bqcl$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93859
On 16/10/2026 13:20, Tapiro Ubriaco wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 13:07:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>>> Mh, this reminds me that I will never wrap my head around the fact that
>>> English uses the same word ("engineer") for a person who works with a
>>> slide rule and a pencil and a person who works with a wrench.
>>
>> There is very little difference. Only in degree.
>> That why the English are the best engineers in the world.
> 
> Not to mention the best cuisine.

I am not claiming that,. While its streets ahead of American, Eastern 
European or Nordic, I think one has to hand it to the southern nations. 
Italy, Greece, Thailand - for some of the best food that concentrates on 
flavour and variety rather than the pure calories of  the higher latitudes.



-- 
"First, find out who are the people you can not criticise. They are your 
oppressors."
      - George Orwell

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

#93915

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2026-10-16 19:32 +0000
Message-ID<njfcdkFit4rU25@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#93856
On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 13:07:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> There is very little difference. Only in degree.
> That why the English are the best engineers in the world. They can work
> a slide rule AND a torque wrench

Even back in the '60s there were a number of Indian students. If you got 
one as a lab partner you let them run the slide rule but never let them 
touch a screwdriver.  Typically they were upper middle class, very 
intelligent, but they'd never taken stuff apart and put it back together 
like most US kids who wound up in an engineering school.

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

#93927

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-10-16 22:21 +0100
Message-ID<11au4hl$3k12p$17@dont-email.me>
In reply to#93915
On 16/10/2026 20:32, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2026 13:07:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>> There is very little difference. Only in degree.
>> That why the English are the best engineers in the world. They can work
>> a slide rule AND a torque wrench
> 
> Even back in the '60s there were a number of Indian students. If you got
> one as a lab partner you let them run the slide rule but never let them
> touch a screwdriver.  Typically they were upper middle class, very
> intelligent, but they'd never taken stuff apart and put it back together
> like most US kids who wound up in an engineering school.
> 
Yes. I know that type. They are natural software people as you don't get 
your hands dirty.
Don't get me started on the middle easterners though...


-- 
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

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

Page 5 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 13  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web