Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #93793 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-10-16 03:26 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-10-18 10:59 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 409 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
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 John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 12:19 -0700
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 Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:48 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:12 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 13:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 14:40 +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 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:56 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:00 +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 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:37 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 03:03 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:02 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:40 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-18 20:11 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:53 +0200
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 Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:37 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:04 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:17 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-19 17:33 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:19 +0000
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 Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:36 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:03 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 12:39 +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 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 John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:58 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 03:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 09:06 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 19:04 +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 John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 15:09 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 09:16 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 13:37 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 09:13 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:56 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-21 14:23 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:14 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:22 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 10:54 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:07 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 14:02 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 15:17 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 20:06 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:26 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:07 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 11:49 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 15:09 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:08 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-22 10:37 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 19:29 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 09:13 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 10:04 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 20:16 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-22 02:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:51 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 14:18 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 19:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:15 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-21 17:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:20 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:42 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:16 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 18:26 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 11:46 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:57 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 09:01 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 20:14 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:27 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:23 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Leroy H <lh@somewhere.net> - 2026-10-20 19:33 +0000
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 Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 02:48 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-20 18:15 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 19:04 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:27 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 20:08 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-20 23:18 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:33 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-21 03:22 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:25 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 01:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-21 10:09 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 19:06 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:09 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 16:50 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:35 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-22 07:18 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-22 13:44 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:59 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 13:48 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:58 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:56 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-22 17:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-22 20:04 +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 Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:07 +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 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:11 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:13 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-19 11:39 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-18 18:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 03:22 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-19 03:55 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:58 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2026-10-18 20:07 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:41 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:21 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-19 22:30 +0200
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 Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:05 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:25 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 20:19 +0000
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 Anton Antimo <anton@safunu.org> - 2026-10-19 17:18 -0300
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Helmut Waitzmann <nn.throttle@erine.email> - 2026-10-21 00:54 +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 John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 09:37 -0700
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 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:59 +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 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 20:01 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-18 22:25 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 03:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 21:48 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-19 11:29 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:29 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:34 +0100
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-19 18:51 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 19:57 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI John Bokma <contact@johnbokma.com> - 2026-10-19 22:24 +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 Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 11:31 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:40 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 16:09 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 02:58 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 21:43 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 21:22 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-19 10:42 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 17:09 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-20 16:28 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 19:30 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-21 06:24 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-21 12:27 -0700
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-22 08:48 +0100
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 20:05 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 14:38 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:38 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-18 16:07 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> - 2026-10-18 23:44 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 22:09 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> - 2026-10-19 09:54 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 08:40 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> - 2026-10-19 10:55 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 00:54 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor.this.should.not.be.used@nexgo.REMOVETHIS.de> - 2026-10-20 08:08 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-20 07:50 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Blaine <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-10-20 18:06 -0600
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:59 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-19 07:16 -0400
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:33 +0200
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-21 02:52 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 19:47 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 21:36 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-10-19 00:22 -0400
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 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-18 22:03 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-19 09:01 +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 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:17 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 21:31 -0700
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 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-18 19:28 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-19 08:01 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-10-19 20:05 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-20 09:16 +0100
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 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-19 02:19 +0000
Re: Back To CS Basics. Fuck AI Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-10-19 08:20 +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 Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 13:09 +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 6 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 21 Next page →
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 08:22 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11bcdjn$k5sf$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94509 |
On 21/10/2026 20:14, rbowman wrote: > On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:56:59 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> Metaphysicians might argue, and many do, that all science and >> mathematics is not the discovery of rules within the world itself, but >> merely in the worldviews of the humans that construct it . > > Some philosophers would argue that metaphysics is a human construction > after the Greeks took a very wrong turn. > The reason why it has a 'meta' in its name is because it is the *study* of human constructions... Naturally recursion will get you if you try and use it to study itself.... > I use arithmetic in the commonplace world but I'd argue when you say '2' > you've already went off the rails by creating an abstraction from reality. Of course. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day."....etc etc. Substitute 'consciousness' for 'god' and you arrive at transcendental idealism... Similarly the Eden myth describes the moment when consciousness becomes aware of itself... That is the worldview we all have but very few know they have, instead thinking that the world they create is actually independent. Or, if they are raving lefties, thinking that it is dependent, but there is no power or order greater than human thought, which can change men into women, or create energy out of thin air etc *shrug*. The moment you start to see the world as related objects, instead of a unified whole, you *invent* mathematics. -- Climate is what you expect but weather is what you get. Mark Twain
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 17:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <njuu19FiqckU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94526 |
On Thu, 22 Oct 2026 08:22:31 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 21/10/2026 20:14, rbowman wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:56:59 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> Metaphysicians might argue, and many do, that all science and >>> mathematics is not the discovery of rules within the world itself, but >>> merely in the worldviews of the humans that construct it . >> >> Some philosophers would argue that metaphysics is a human construction >> after the Greeks took a very wrong turn. >> > The reason why it has a 'meta' in its name is because it is the *study* > of human constructions... Or it was the collection of bits and pieces Aristotle wrote after Physics. Personally I've found his writings to be impenetrable. The closest I've come is a couple of collections of Heidegger's lectures that consist of notes to himself augmented by the class notes some student tried to take.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 10:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20261020105404.000027e5@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #94384 |
On Tue, 20 Oct 2026 09:16:25 +0100 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > You yourself started off this discussion talking about "music > > existing ten thousand years before music theory," so grouping > > classical Chinese and Pythagorean thought in with post-Renaissance > > Western theory is as fair as anything. They didn't have*any* of > > those in the Paleolithic. > > There are those who thinks that science discovers truths and > mathematics are inherent to the universe and you cant do anything > without a 'theory' > > Philosophers have by and large concluded that that is all bollox. All > of them are human *inventions*. Nobody but you is claiming "you can't do anything without a theory" as a position implied by an analytical outlook. Of *course* you can, and millions *did,* before anybody got around to developing it; the fact that these things are discoverable means you don't have to be *told* in order to make use of them. Theory is nothing more than an attempt to codify what's *been* discovered, to make it easier to learn & apply. > If you want to *believe* otherwise, there isn't much I can say I don't have to "believe" anything here; the fact that mathematics is innately complete and inherent to reality is self-demonstrating, as any child who's ever learned to count should know. Have two, get two, have four - that's addition, and it was so before the very first hominid who stopped to *think* about the number of tasty bits of fruit and game in his private cache. Nature has been adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing things from the first instant of the universe, and it'd be doing that even if we'd never gotten around to putting names to those. > > How come the instruments have fixed notes, and these appeared very > > very long ago? before the theory was developed formally? > > Because it is in the nature of musical instruments to produce one or > more fixed notes It's in the nature of *some* instruments to produce fixed notes; others (e.g. unfretted string instruments, slide whistles, or the human voice) are not thus limited. And for those which are - which notes, and why? Certainly the folks chipping flutes out of bone in the caves of the Ice Age got it by trial and error, but there *is* a system to it, as we'd worked out by the days of ancient Mesopotamia (we have Sumerian texts on music theory going back to 2+ millennia BC.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 10:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11b9vcf$3p0ft$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94409 |
On 20/10/2026 18:54, John Ames wrote: > On Tue, 20 Oct 2026 09:16:25 +0100 > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >>> You yourself started off this discussion talking about "music >>> existing ten thousand years before music theory," so grouping >>> classical Chinese and Pythagorean thought in with post-Renaissance >>> Western theory is as fair as anything. They didn't have*any* of >>> those in the Paleolithic. >> >> There are those who thinks that science discovers truths and >> mathematics are inherent to the universe and you cant do anything >> without a 'theory' >> >> Philosophers have by and large concluded that that is all bollox. All >> of them are human *inventions*. > > Nobody but you is claiming "you can't do anything without a theory" Actually that is exactly what they *are* doing > as > a position implied by an analytical outlook. Of *course* you can, and > millions *did,* before anybody got around to developing it; the fact > that these things are discoverable means you don't have to be *told* in > order to make use of them. Theory is nothing more than an attempt to > codify what's *been* discovered, to make it easier to learn & apply. > >> If you want to *believe* otherwise, there isn't much I can say > > I don't have to "believe" anything here; the fact that mathematics is > innately complete and inherent to reality is self-demonstrating, as any > child who's ever learned to count should know. Gödels Incompleteness theorem ? > Have two, get two, have > four - that's addition, and it was so before the very first hominid who > stopped to *think* about the number of tasty bits of fruit and game in > his private cache. Nature has been adding, subtracting, multiplying, > and dividing things from the first instant of the universe, and it'd be > doing that even if we'd never gotten around to putting names to those. > Nature hasn't Human minds have >>> How come the instruments have fixed notes, and these appeared very >>> very long ago? before the theory was developed formally? >> >> Because it is in the nature of musical instruments to produce one or >> more fixed notes > > It's in the nature of *some* instruments to produce fixed notes; others > (e.g. unfretted string instruments, slide whistles, or the human voice) > are not thus limited. > > And for those which are - which notes, and why? Certainly the folks > chipping flutes out of bone in the caves of the Ice Age got it by trial > and error, but there *is* a system to it, as we'd worked out by the > days of ancient Mesopotamia (we have Sumerian texts on music theory > going back to 2+ millennia BC.) > Whichjh I am sure every single black slave learnt before creating jazz, rhythm and blues out of exposure to the white man's instruments -- Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early twenty-first century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a rollback of the industrial age. Richard Lindzen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 14:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <njruvdF3j5uU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94454 |
On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:07:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > Whichjh I am sure every single black slave learnt before creating jazz, > rhythm and blues out of exposure to the white man's instruments I'm sure Bach would be appalled by bending a note.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 15:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11bahi4$b33$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94492 |
On 21/10/2026 15:02, rbowman wrote: > On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:07:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> Whichjh I am sure every single black slave learnt before creating jazz, >> rhythm and blues out of exposure to the white man's instruments > > I'm sure Bach would be appalled by bending a note. Who the fuck cares? Plenty of heavy metal/classical guitarists shredding Bach out of existence I wonder what nightingales know of music theory -- "I guess a rattlesnake ain't risponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah puts mah heel on um jess the same if'n I catches him around mah chillun".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 20:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <njska0F3j5uU13@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94493 |
On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 15:17:39 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 21/10/2026 15:02, rbowman wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:07:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> Whichjh I am sure every single black slave learnt before creating >>> jazz, >>> rhythm and blues out of exposure to the white man's instruments >> >> I'm sure Bach would be appalled by bending a note. > > Who the fuck cares? Plenty of heavy metal/classical guitarists shredding > Bach out of existence True but they use the Shitty-Tempered Fender. Much of that goes back to Africans exposed to western instruments. 'Man, dat doan sound right. Gonna choke the shit outta dat thing. Flat dem fifths'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 08:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11bcdr0$k5sf$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94517 |
On 21/10/2026 21:06, rbowman wrote: > On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 15:17:39 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> On 21/10/2026 15:02, rbowman wrote: >>> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:07:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> >>>> Whichjh I am sure every single black slave learnt before creating >>>> jazz, >>>> rhythm and blues out of exposure to the white man's instruments >>> >>> I'm sure Bach would be appalled by bending a note. >> >> Who the fuck cares? Plenty of heavy metal/classical guitarists shredding >> Bach out of existence > > True but they use the Shitty-Tempered Fender. Mor like bumfucking Gibsons usually - easier to play fast > Much of that goes back to > Africans exposed to western instruments. 'Man, dat doan sound right. Gonna > choke the shit outta dat thing. Flat dem fifths' > Exactly. Having a feel for something is not the same as formal theory. African music mimics the sound of heart beats, animals in the bush...transfer it to New Orleans where the ladies with parasols sit listening to Mozart, and the natural African humour takes over and parodies it. Classical music played by a drunk. That's jazz. -- Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 17:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <njuu75FiqckU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94527 |
On Thu, 22 Oct 2026 08:26:24 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 21/10/2026 21:06, rbowman wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 15:17:39 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> On 21/10/2026 15:02, rbowman wrote: >>>> On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:07:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> >>>>> Whichjh I am sure every single black slave learnt before creating >>>>> jazz, >>>>> rhythm and blues out of exposure to the white man's instruments >>>> >>>> I'm sure Bach would be appalled by bending a note. >>> >>> Who the fuck cares? Plenty of heavy metal/classical guitarists >>> shredding Bach out of existence >> >> True but they use the Shitty-Tempered Fender. > > Mor like bumfucking Gibsons usually - easier to play fast Better in a fight too. I have a Epiphone Les Paul that, if nothing else, copies the heft of the Gibson model.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 11:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20261021114918.000056b6@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #94454 |
On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:07:27 +0100 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > Have two, get two, have four - that's addition, and it was so > > before the very first hominid who stopped to *think* about the > > number of tasty bits of fruit and game in his private cache. Nature > > has been adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing things from > > the first instant of the universe, and it'd be doing that even if > > we'd never gotten around to putting names to those. > > Nature hasn't Human minds have Force of impact is equal to mass * velocity^2. Gravitational attract- ion falls off with the square of distance; magnetic force falls off with its cube. Math is happening across the universe and all around you, whether you recognize it or not. > > And for those which are - which notes, and why? Certainly the folks > > chipping flutes out of bone in the caves of the Ice Age got it by > > trial and error, but there *is* a system to it, as we'd worked out > > by the days of ancient Mesopotamia (we have Sumerian texts on music > > theory going back to 2+ millennia BC.) > > Whichjh I am sure every single black slave learnt before creating > jazz, rhythm and blues out of exposure to the white man's instruments Again you do not seem to grasp that "did not receive a formal education in a Western musical college" does *not* mean "never learned anything from anyone and created the whole thing ex nihilo." And African-American music forms didn't just spring out of a vacuum, either; blues picked up notable influences from music of the Islamic world due to the Sahel heritage of many slaves taken to the Americas, and early jazz blended an approach to harmony influenced by European hymnody with traditional African and American folk music. They are hybrid forms developed by people who were exposed to a wide variety of musical traditions and deliberately incorporated the elements they liked into something unique, not just something that happens when you toss a fungible mass of black people into a roomful of instruments. > > And those fixed notes tend to have fixed relationships between them > > (e.g. harmonics). > > No, they dont. > > On multi-fixed pitch like say pan pipes or an ocarina, they are made > to have that relationship because its sounds 'better', in a way that > no one can really explain, to random spacings > > Possibly the theory of intermodulation distortion can say why, but no > music theory can. "No one can really explain" is a funny way of saying "I, personally, do not know." In reality - as has already been discussed - the basic relationship of harmony to simple frequency ratios has been understood for millennia; this gave rise to tuning systems derived from integer multiples (what is commonly called Pythagorean tuning, although it actually predates Pythagoras and was probably independently invented in multiple places, as in e.g. the Chinese instrument we were discussing elsethread.) This is an attractively simple way to do things, because the basics are both easy to calculate and easy to tune by ear - 2:1 is an octave, 3:2 is a fifth, and you can stack fifths and drop back down an octave to successively derive each note on the scale... ...almost. Unfortunately, basic math says no power of 1.5 is ever going to be a power of 2, and by the time you get from C up to B, you're at an octave-adjusted multiple of 0.94921875 - over 5% left to go before you reach the octave! This is known as the "wolf interval," and various traditions have different ways of dealing with it: Chinese traditional, I gather, shuffles it around in different modes, while AFAICT Indian 24- tone music is actually a whole family of scales in which sets of notes are pitched differently to avoid it. Equal temperament in Western music divides it up by spacing each note slightly wider than the ideal, so that the difference isn't terribly noticeable and the steps all add up. So there you have it: a straightforward reason for the conspicuously non-random intervals between notes. > Who the fuck cares? Plenty of heavy metal/classical guitarists > shredding Bach out of existence And yet another *immensely* funny take. Would this be a good time to point out that, f'rexample, Ritchie Blackmore's solo in "Highway Star" was inspired by ol' J.S. himself? > I wonder what nightingales know of music theory When circumstances align to let me become one, I'll be sure and write it up for you. Until then, I'm content to learn what I can and quietly envy the creatures that can do it by instinct.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 15:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20261021150910.00002be8@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #94507 |
On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 11:49:18 -0700 John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote: > go before you reach the octave! This is known as the "wolf interval," :s/wolf interval/Pythagorean comma/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 08:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11bccpq$k5sf$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94507 |
On 21/10/2026 19:49, John Ames wrote: > On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:07:27 +0100 > Force of impact is equal to mass * velocity^2. Gravitational attract- > ion falls off with the square of distance; magnetic force falls off > with its cube. Math is happening across the universe and all around > you, whether you recognize it or not. > Distance, mass, velocity, gravity, etc are all inventions of the human mind As is the relationship between them > Again you do not seem to grasp that "did not receive a formal education > in a Western musical college" does *not* mean "never learned anything > from anyone and created the whole thing ex nihilo." > But that was in fact the whole point. Thgat 'formal' exducatuons was absolutely *necessary* in order to make music > And African-American music forms didn't just spring out of a vacuum, > either; blues picked up notable influences from music of the Islamic > world due to the Sahel heritage of many slaves taken to the Americas, > and early jazz blended an approach to harmony influenced by European > hymnody with traditional African and American folk music. They are > hybrid forms developed by people who were exposed to a wide variety of > musical traditions and deliberately incorporated the elements they > liked into something unique, not just something that happens when you > toss a fungible mass of black people into a roomful of instruments. > You have never been to Africa, clearly > "No one can really explain" is a funny way of saying "I, personally, do > not know." > No, it isn't. No one knows why anything is, in the limit, the way it is. > In reality - as has already been discussed - the basic relationship of > harmony to simple frequency ratios has been understood for millennia; > this gave rise to tuning systems derived from integer multiples (what > is commonly called Pythagorean tuning, although it actually predates > Pythagoras and was probably independently invented in multiple places, > as in e.g. the Chinese instrument we were discussing elsethread.) > None of which ever helped people *compose* better music. If that were all it took, we wouldnt have individual composers of note > This is an attractively simple way to do things, because the basics are > both easy to calculate and easy to tune by ear - 2:1 is an octave, 3:2 > is a fifth, and you can stack fifths and drop back down an octave to > successively derive each note on the scale... > Grsndmother, eggs, suck > ...almost. Unfortunately, basic math says no power of 1.5 is ever going > to be a power of 2, and by the time you get from C up to B, you're at > an octave-adjusted multiple of 0.94921875 - over 5% left to go before > you reach the octave! This is known as the "wolf interval," and various > traditions have different ways of dealing with it: Chinese traditional, > I gather, shuffles it around in different modes, while AFAICT Indian 24- > tone music is actually a whole family of scales in which sets of notes > are pitched differently to avoid it. Equal temperament in Western music > divides it up by spacing each note slightly wider than the ideal, so > that the difference isn't terribly noticeable and the steps all add up. > > So there you have it: a straightforward reason for the conspicuously > non-random intervals between notes. > A mathematical relationship is not a reason >> Who the fuck cares? Plenty of heavy metal/classical guitarists >> shredding Bach out of existence > > And yet another *immensely* funny take. Would this be a good time to > point out that, f'rexample, Ritchie Blackmore's solo in "Highway Star" > was inspired by ol' J.S. himself? > *shrug* did he READ music? did he go to MUSIC COLLEGE? >> I wonder what nightingales know of music theory > > When circumstances align to let me become one, I'll be sure and write > it up for you. Until then, I'm content to learn what I can and quietly > envy the creatures that can do it by instinct. > Including human ones -- "Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) " Alan Sokal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 10:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20261022103723.0000056b@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #94524 |
On Thu, 22 Oct 2026 08:08:42 +0100 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > Force of impact is equal to mass * velocity^2. Gravitational > > attraction falls off with the square of distance; magnetic force > > falls off with its cube. Math is happening across the universe and > > all around you, whether you recognize it or not. > > Distance, mass, velocity, gravity, etc are all inventions of the > human mind As is the relationship between them Y'know, I wasn't expecting us to land in full-blown solipsism here, but as you've progressively gone from arguing against your peculiar inter- pretations of what other people are saying to arguing that none of the grounds for other people's positions are real and there's no reason for anything (or, at least, anything you don't personally hold with someone else's explanation of,) I guess it shouldn't come as a surprise. There are some very straightforward experiments you could perform to put your assertions about the unreality of physics to the test, but I can't say I'd recomend them. > > Again you do not seem to grasp that "did not receive a formal > > education in a Western musical college" does *not* mean "never > > learned anything from anyone and created the whole thing ex nihilo." > > But that was in fact the whole point. Thgat 'formal' exducatuons was > absolutely *necessary* in order to make music That's more what you *imagine* to be someone else's stance in the hypo- thetical Tapiro posited back when this discussion turned from a general screed about theory vs. practice to music theory specifically, at which point a number of people of various musical backgrounds here jumped in to observe that you plainly had no idea what you were talking about. What they've *actually* said has, at most, been that music education is a *practical necessity* for a career as a performing musician, which is a very different thing. > > "No one can really explain" is a funny way of saying "I, > > personally, do not know." > > No, it isn't. > > No one knows why anything is, in the limit, the way it is. That's an extraordinarily convenient line of argument when you don't have actual counterpoints to other people's positions. > > In reality - as has already been discussed - the basic relationship > > of harmony to simple frequency ratios has been understood for > > millennia; this gave rise to tuning systems derived from integer > > multiples (what is commonly called Pythagorean tuning, although it > > actually predates Pythagoras and was probably independently > > invented in multiple places, as in e.g. the Chinese instrument we > > were discussing elsethread.) > > None of which ever helped people *compose* better music. > If that were all it took, we wouldnt have individual composers of note Nobody has *said* that's "all it took." We were talking about the notes on a scale and the reasons behind the values they've been assigned. > > This is an attractively simple way to do things, because the basics > > are both easy to calculate and easy to tune by ear - 2:1 is an > > octave, 3:2 is a fifth, and you can stack fifths and drop back down > > an octave to successively derive each note on the scale... > > Grsndmother, eggs, suck ...would you like to phrase that in the form of a sentence? > > ...almost. Unfortunately, basic math says no power of 1.5 is ever > > going to be a power of 2, and by the time you get from C up to B, > > you're at an octave-adjusted multiple of 0.94921875 - over 5% left > > to go before you reach the octave! This is known as the "wolf > > interval," and various traditions have different ways of dealing > > with it: Chinese traditional, I gather, shuffles it around in > > different modes, while AFAICT Indian 24- tone music is actually a > > whole family of scales in which sets of notes are pitched > > differently to avoid it. Equal temperament in Western music divides > > it up by spacing each note slightly wider than the ideal, so that > > the difference isn't terribly noticeable and the steps all add up. > > > > So there you have it: a straightforward reason for the conspicuously > > non-random intervals between notes. > > A mathematical relationship is not a reason Sure, buddy. Sure. > > And yet another *immensely* funny take. Would this be a good time to > > point out that, f'rexample, Ritchie Blackmore's solo in "Highway > > Star" was inspired by ol' J.S. himself? > > *shrug* did he READ music? He took classical guitar lessons in middle school, so that'd be a "yes." > Or, if they are raving lefties, thinking that it is dependent, but > there is no power or order greater than human thought, which can > change men into women, or create energy out of thin air etc So you don't believe in a definite/concrete material universe, but you're a bio-essentialist when it comes to gender identity? Only on Usenet, folks!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 19:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11bdklq$13lnp$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94565 |
On 22/10/2026 18:37, John Ames wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Oct 2026 08:08:42 +0100
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> Force of impact is equal to mass * velocity^2. Gravitational
>>> attraction falls off with the square of distance; magnetic force
>>> falls off with its cube. Math is happening across the universe and
>>> all around you, whether you recognize it or not.
>>
>> Distance, mass, velocity, gravity, etc are all inventions of the
>> human mind As is the relationship between them
>
> Y'know, I wasn't expecting us to land in full-blown solipsism here,
And you haven't.
but
> as you've progressively gone from arguing against your peculiar inter-
> pretations of what other people are saying to arguing that none of the
> grounds for other people's positions are real and there's no reason for
> anything (or, at least, anything you don't personally hold with someone
> else's explanation of,) I guess it shouldn't come as a surprise.
>
> There are some very straightforward experiments you could perform to
> put your assertions about the unreality of physics to the test, but I
> can't say I'd recomend them.
>
You fail to comprehend
Physics is real *in the context of the 'rational materialist' world
view* but that worldview is not the only one that exists. AS Quantum
physics is begiining to strongly suggest
>>> Again you do not seem to grasp that "did not receive a formal
>>> education in a Western musical college" does *not* mean "never
>>> learned anything from anyone and created the whole thing ex nihilo."
>>
>> But that was in fact the whole point. Thgat 'formal' exducatuons was
>> absolutely *necessary* in order to make music
>
> That's more what you *imagine* to be someone else's stance in the hypo-
> thetical Tapiro posited back when this discussion turned from a general
> screed about theory vs. practice to music theory specifically, at which
> point a number of people of various musical backgrounds here jumped in
> to observe that you plainly had no idea what you were talking about.
> What they've *actually* said has, at most, been that music education is
> a *practical necessity* for a career as a performing musician, which is
> a very different thing.
And I cited many musicians not of the classical persuasion who refute
that proposition
Keith Richards is largely self-taught and has no formal conservatory or
academic musical training.
Early Influences and Introduction
Maternal Grandfather: His musical journey began with his maternal
grandfather, Augustus Theodore "Gus" Dupree, a big-band jazz leader who
played various instruments and kept a guitar in the house.
First Lesson: Dupree showed young Richards the single-note melody
to the Spanish classical piece "Malagueña" using his fingers, rather
than teaching formal chords or music reading.
Self-Directed Learning: After learning basic open chords (E major,
F major, G major, A minor), Richards taught himself the rest of the
instrument by repeatedly listening to records.
School and Choral Background
Dartford Technical School: He sang in the school choir as a youth,
which helped train his ear for harmony and vocal blending.
Sidcup Art College: He attended art college later on, where he
continued to focus on music and met future bandmates rather than
pursuing a formal music degree.
GuitarMasterClass.net
Style and Development
Record Listening: He honed his craft by studying American blues,
jazz, and early rock-and-roll records, closely analyzing artists like
Chuck Berry, Scotty Moore, Muddy Waters, and Robert Johnson.
Acoustic Foundation: He famously advocates starting on an acoustic
guitar to master finger placement, string feel, and clean execution
before moving on to electric amplification or effects.
>>> "No one can really explain" is a funny way of saying "I,
>>> personally, do not know."
>>
>> No, it isn't.
>>
>> No one knows why anything is, in the limit, the way it is.
>
> That's an extraordinarily convenient line of argument when you don't
> have actual counterpoints to other people's positions.
Well in the general case its valid: People think that theory answers the
question of 'why things are the way they are' but it doesn't
That is, it is my conetention having studied to a vcry high degree in
academia, that theory is more like the froth on the beer of practical
existence. Amusing, but seldom of any real nourishment
>
>>> In reality - as has already been discussed - the basic relationship
>>> of harmony to simple frequency ratios has been understood for
>>> millennia; this gave rise to tuning systems derived from integer
>>> multiples (what is commonly called Pythagorean tuning, although it
>>> actually predates Pythagoras and was probably independently
>>> invented in multiple places, as in e.g. the Chinese instrument we
>>> were discussing elsethread.)
>>
>> None of which ever helped people *compose* better music.
>> If that were all it took, we wouldnt have individual composers of note
>
> Nobody has *said* that's "all it took." We were talking about the notes
> on a scale and the reasons behind the values they've been assigned.
The reasons are not that theory says so. They were assigned long before
the theory
>
>>> This is an attractively simple way to do things, because the basics
>>> are both easy to calculate and easy to tune by ear - 2:1 is an
>>> octave, 3:2 is a fifth, and you can stack fifths and drop back down
>>> an octave to successively derive each note on the scale...
>>
>> Grsndmother, eggs, suck
>
> ...would you like to phrase that in the form of a sentence?
>
No
>>> ...almost. Unfortunately, basic math says no power of 1.5 is ever
>>> going to be a power of 2, and by the time you get from C up to B,
>>> you're at an octave-adjusted multiple of 0.94921875 - over 5% left
>>> to go before you reach the octave! This is known as the "wolf
>>> interval," and various traditions have different ways of dealing
>>> with it: Chinese traditional, I gather, shuffles it around in
>>> different modes, while AFAICT Indian 24- tone music is actually a
>>> whole family of scales in which sets of notes are pitched
>>> differently to avoid it. Equal temperament in Western music divides
>>> it up by spacing each note slightly wider than the ideal, so that
>>> the difference isn't terribly noticeable and the steps all add up.
>>>
>>> So there you have it: a straightforward reason for the conspicuously
>>> non-random intervals between notes.
>>
>> A mathematical relationship is not a reason
>
> Sure, buddy. Sure.
Oh dear
>
>>> And yet another *immensely* funny take. Would this be a good time to
>>> point out that, f'rexample, Ritchie Blackmore's solo in "Highway
>>> Star" was inspired by ol' J.S. himself?
>>
>> *shrug* did he READ music?
>
> He took classical guitar lessons in middle school, so that'd be a "yes."
>
I never rated him as particularly good mind you.
>> Or, if they are raving lefties, thinking that it is dependent, but
>> there is no power or order greater than human thought, which can
>> change men into women, or create energy out of thin air etc
>
> So you don't believe in a definite/concrete material universe, but
> you're a bio-essentialist when it comes to gender identity?
>
Again, you have completely missed the point.
I do beleive in a definite universe, but not one made of concrete and
certainly not the one you *thinks* is the material universe.
I thought you knew your Kant....
> Only on Usenet, folks!
>
--
"First, find out who are the people you can not criticise. They are your
oppressors."
- George Orwell
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 09:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11b9vno$3o235$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94409 |
On Tue, 20 Oct 2026 10:54:04 -0700, John Ames wrote: > I don't have to "believe" anything here; the fact that mathematics is > innately complete and inherent to reality is self-demonstrating, as any > child who's ever learned to count should know. Have two, get two, have > four - that's addition, and it was so before the very first hominid who > stopped to *think* about the number of tasty bits of fruit and game in > his private cache. Then again, it's self evident that the inner angles of a triangle always sum up to a straight angle. Any child who has tried to cut a triangle out of a sheet of paper, and then cut the angles and lay them adjacent to one another should know. A more adventurous child might have tried to do that with a triangle drawn on an orange, or a balloon... and found out they don't necessarily add up :-) That child would have then found out the need to systematise geometry and distinguish between Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometries with their axioms and rules of inference... :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 10:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20261021100437.000079a4@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #94456 |
On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 09:13:29 -0000 (UTC) Tapiro Ubriaco <interwebs.dude@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't have to "believe" anything here; the fact that mathematics > > is innately complete and inherent to reality is self-demonstrating, > > as any child who's ever learned to count should know. Have two, get > > two, have four - that's addition, and it was so before the very > > first hominid who stopped to *think* about the number of tasty bits > > of fruit and game in his private cache. > > Then again, it's self evident that the inner angles of a triangle > always sum up to a straight angle. > > Any child who has tried to cut a triangle out of a sheet of paper, > and then cut the angles and lay them adjacent to one another should > know. > > A more adventurous child might have tried to do that with a triangle > drawn on an orange, or a balloon... and found out they don't > necessarily add up :-) > > That child would have then found out the need to systematise geometry > and distinguish between Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometries with > their axioms and rules of inference... :-) Sure - but this is also discoverable, as your own example shows. It's certainly quicker and easier to learn from someone who already knows, but it's *possible* to work this stuff out independently.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-21 20:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <njskt8F3j5uU15@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #94499 |
On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:04:37 -0700, John Ames wrote: > Sure - but this is also discoverable, as your own example shows. It's > certainly quicker and easier to learn from someone who already knows, > but it's *possible* to work this stuff out independently. iirc one of Plato's dialogs was showing a person he really knew geometry although he didn't know he knew. I wasn't convinced.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-22 02:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11bbqvp$fe31$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94456 |
On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 09:13:29 -0000 (UTC), Tapiro Ubriaco wrote: > Then again, it's self evident that the inner angles of a triangle > always sum up to a straight angle. “Self evident” ... is this some kind of “American Founding Fathers” school of logic?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 10:51 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <blmjqmx0ds.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #94366 |
On 2026-10-20 00:09, John Ames wrote: > On Sun, 18 Oct 2026 11:48:59 +0100 > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >>> The chinese Classic of Music dates back to about 3000 years ago and >>> the Pythagorean school is not that far behind, but ok. >> >> 'music theory' *as we know it today * has only existed a couple of >> hundred years > > You yourself started off this discussion talking about "music existing > ten thousand years before music theory," so grouping classical Chinese > and Pythagorean thought in with post-Renaissance Western theory is as > fair as anything. They didn't have *any* of those in the Paleolithic. How come the instruments have fixed notes, and these appeared very very long ago? before the theory was developed formally? Google says the western notes appeared between 6th and 11th centuries. They had to know some theory. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 14:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <11b7pnp$305dq$11@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #94390 |
On 20/10/2026 09:51, Carlos E.R. wrote: > How come the instruments have fixed notes, and these appeared very very > long ago? before the theory was developed formally? Because it is in the nature of musical instruments to produce one or more fixed notes -- “It is not the truth of Marxism that explains the willingness of intellectuals to believe it, but the power that it confers on intellectuals, in their attempts to control the world. And since...it is futile to reason someone out of a thing that he was not reasoned into, we can conclude that Marxism owes its remarkable power to survive every criticism to the fact that it is not a truth-directed but a power-directed system of thought.” Sir Roger Scruton
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web