Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming > #11866 > unrolled thread
| Started by | H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-01-21 07:11 -0800 |
| Last post | 2021-01-21 20:39 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 27 — 5 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.programming
Getting random numbers. H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 07:11 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. Tavis Ormandy <taviso@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 15:25 +0000
Re: Getting random numbers. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-01-21 16:38 +0100
Re: Getting random numbers. Tavis Ormandy <taviso@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 16:37 +0000
Re: Getting random numbers. chovy <chovy@pm.me> - 2021-01-21 08:37 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-01-21 18:00 +0100
Re: Getting random numbers. H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 09:29 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. Tavis Ormandy <taviso@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 18:02 +0000
Re: Getting random numbers. chovy <chovy@pm.me> - 2021-01-21 10:11 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 10:21 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. Tavis Ormandy <taviso@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 18:39 +0000
Re: Getting random numbers. Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2021-01-22 06:32 +0000
Re: Getting random numbers. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-01-22 08:51 +0100
Re: Getting random numbers. Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2021-01-22 09:15 +0000
Re: Getting random numbers. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-01-22 11:13 +0100
Re: Getting random numbers. Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2021-01-23 09:27 +0000
Re: Getting random numbers. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-01-23 12:28 +0100
Re: Getting random numbers. Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2021-01-23 12:10 +0000
Re: Getting random numbers. chovy <chovy@pm.me> - 2021-01-21 10:11 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-01-21 20:55 +0100
Re: Getting random numbers. H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 13:08 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. chovy <chovy@pm.me> - 2021-01-21 13:53 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-01-21 22:53 +0100
Re: Getting random numbers. H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 13:57 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 15:13 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 15:20 -0800
Re: Getting random numbers. H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> - 2021-01-21 20:39 -0800
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →
| From | H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 07:11 -0800 |
| Subject | Getting random numbers. |
| Message-ID | <33e7892e-fe91-4440-9843-515c88da309an@googlegroups.com> |
<html>
<body>
<div id="aa1" style="width: 100%; word-wrap: break-word;">
</div>
<script>
var a1=0;
var a2=54.32
var a3=3.43;
var a4=5.53;
var a5=34.75;
var a0001=-1;
for(var i=0; i<2132; i++) {
a0001=(-1)*a0001;
var i01=i^1.914643966346+i^1.260774037134;
a1=a5^1.206040306030407046073;
a2=1.30461*a1^1.92423523;
a3=3.470347*a2^1.3620346375;
a4=2.306463*a3^1.5437347;
a5=a0001*a4*i01^1.2643634704673;
document.getElementById("aa1").append((a1^(2.04326974)-1.34634769432*a2^(3.5324986798213)+1.43986739*a3^(4.23460181704968)-1.3489679834*a4^(5.120398567219386)+1.48693>
}
var aa001=document.getElementById("aa1").innerHTML;
aa001=aa001.replace(/\./g,'');
aa001=aa001.replace(/\+/g,'');
aa001=aa001.replace(/e/g,'');
aa001=aa001.replace(/\-/g,'');
document.getElementById("aa1").innerHTML=aa001;
</script>
</body>
</html>
Kr.
372 6861327
ya12983 mail co m
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tavis Ormandy <taviso@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 15:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <i6tknsFvfeU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #11866 |
On 2021-01-21, H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> wrote: > var i01=i^1.914643966346+i^1.260774037134; I realise you're probably not going to listen to me, but it seems like you think ^ is the exponentiation operator, it's actually bitwise xor. That isn't defined for floats - so they're just truncated (that means everything after the decimal point is discarded). You can try ** or Math.pow instead, but I really think you should read about the diehard tests or TestU01 first to understand how PRNGs are evaluated. Tavis. -- _o) $ lynx lock.cmpxchg8b.com /\\ _o) _o) $ finger taviso@sdf.org _\_V _( ) _( ) @taviso
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 16:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ruc76j$f3l$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #11867 |
On 21/01/2021 16:25, Tavis Ormandy wrote: > On 2021-01-21, H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> wrote: >> var i01=i^1.914643966346+i^1.260774037134; > > I realise you're probably not going to listen to me, but it seems like > you think ^ is the exponentiation operator, it's actually bitwise xor. > That isn't defined for floats - so they're just truncated (that means > everything after the decimal point is discarded). > > You can try ** or Math.pow instead, but I really think you should read > about the diehard tests or TestU01 first to understand how PRNGs are > evaluated. > > Tavis. > You might as well give up. He's an idiot who thinks he is a genius - he doesn't even begin to understand how wrong he is on almost everything he writes. Some people have suggested he is a troll - he's not that clever. Like Amine, he is completely disconnected from reality. He can't program. He doesn't know what you mean by "operator". He doesn't know what "random" means, or what speed means in programming - yet he thinks he can make a better and faster random function than anyone else. I've tried being patient, I've tried explanations, help, sample code, and information. I am a big fan of trying to help beginners at programming (and helping experts - none of us is infallible or knows everything in the field), but like Amine, this guy is beyond the kind of help we can give him. He needs a good kick up the backside, and being banned from the internet until he has finished his homework, and his mummy has checked the posts he makes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tavis Ormandy <taviso@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 16:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <i6toudF1egmU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #11868 |
On 2021-01-21, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > I've tried being patient, I've tried explanations, help, sample code, > and information. I am a big fan of trying to help beginners at > programming (and helping experts - none of us is infallible or knows > everything in the field), but like Amine, this guy is beyond the kind of > help we can give him. Yeah, I thought I'd give it one last try before adding a filter... I'm not holding my breath :) -- _o) $ lynx lock.cmpxchg8b.com /\\ _o) _o) $ finger taviso@sdf.org _\_V _( ) _( ) @taviso
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chovy <chovy@pm.me> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 08:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6009add6$0$35081$a92e2ab9@news.vipernews.com> |
| In reply to | #11868 |
On 1/21/21 7:38 AM, David Brown wrote: > On 21/01/2021 16:25, Tavis Ormandy wrote: >> On 2021-01-21, H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> wrote: >>> var i01=i^1.914643966346+i^1.260774037134; >> >> I realise you're probably not going to listen to me, but it seems like >> you think ^ is the exponentiation operator, it's actually bitwise xor. >> That isn't defined for floats - so they're just truncated (that means >> everything after the decimal point is discarded). >> >> You can try ** or Math.pow instead, but I really think you should read >> about the diehard tests or TestU01 first to understand how PRNGs are >> evaluated. >> >> Tavis. >> > > You might as well give up. He's an idiot who thinks he is a genius - he > doesn't even begin to understand how wrong he is on almost everything he > writes. Some people have suggested he is a troll - he's not that > clever. Like Amine, he is completely disconnected from reality. > > He can't program. He doesn't know what you mean by "operator". He > doesn't know what "random" means, or what speed means in programming - > yet he thinks he can make a better and faster random function than > anyone else. > > I've tried being patient, I've tried explanations, help, sample code, > and information. I am a big fan of trying to help beginners at > programming (and helping experts - none of us is infallible or knows > everything in the field), but like Amine, this guy is beyond the kind of > help we can give him. He needs a good kick up the backside, and being > banned from the internet until he has finished his homework, and his > mummy has checked the posts he makes. > go easy on the kid. lol i once had to learn how to do a table layout and if it weren't for #html on efnet I never would have gotten 30 years of webdev under my belt. -- - chovy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 18:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <rucc07$mhv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #11871 |
On 21/01/2021 17:37, chovy wrote: > > go easy on the kid. lol > > i once had to learn how to do a table layout and if it weren't for #html > on efnet I never would have gotten 30 years of webdev under my belt. > I /have/ gone easy on him. Have a look at the posts I've made to him, and the posts he has made. (One thing good can be said about his posting - it has shown that there are a few more lurkers in this group than I thought. If there are some people who actually want to learn something, posting here could still be worth the effort - as long as they don't let Amine and Kristjan scare them away.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 09:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3f62690f-ff35-4b99-84ab-e2bb06fc154bn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #11873 |
David Brown kirjutas neljapäev, 21. jaanuar 2021 kl 19:00:59 UTC+2:
> On 21/01/2021 17:37, chovy wrote:
> >
> > go easy on the kid. lol
> >
> > i once had to learn how to do a table layout and if it weren't for #html
> > on efnet I never would have gotten 30 years of webdev under my belt.
> >
> I /have/ gone easy on him. Have a look at the posts I've made to him,
> and the posts he has made.
>
> (One thing good can be said about his posting - it has shown that there
> are a few more lurkers in this group than I thought. If there are some
> people who actually want to learn something, posting here could still be
> worth the effort - as long as they don't let Amine and Kristjan scare
> them away.)
Hello guys.
Nice to hear critics on me.
I think it had some good points in it.
I have seen, that the code, that I posted was incomplete.
I am sorry for reporting you that.
I copied it directly from "nano" in my manjaro linux. It cuts the ends away.
The last line in "for cycle" is cutted.
The full code:
<html>
<body>
<div id="aa1" style="width: 100%; word-wrap: break-word;">
</div>
<script>
var a1=0;
var a2=54.32
var a3=3.43;
var a4=5.53;
var a5=34.75;
var a0001=-1;
for(var i=0; i<2132; i++) {
a0001=(-1)*a0001;
var i01=i^1.914643966346+i^1.260774037134;
a1=a5^1.206040306030407046073;
a2=1.30461*a1^1.92423523;
a3=3.470347*a2^1.3620346375;
a4=2.306463*a3^1.5437347;
a5=a0001*a4*i01^1.2643634704673;
document.getElementById("aa1").append((a1^(2.04326974)-1.34634769432*a2^(3.5324986798213)+
1.43986739*a3^(4.23460181704968)-1.3489679834*a4^(5.120398567219386)+1.4869374986*a5^(6.280407732347245733547)));
}
var aa001=document.getElementById("aa1").innerHTML;
aa001=aa001.replace(/\./g,'');
aa001=aa001.replace(/\+/g,'');
aa001=aa001.replace(/e/g,'');
aa001=aa001.replace(/\-/g,'');
document.getElementById("aa1").innerHTML=aa001;
</script>
</body>
</html>
Kr.
372 6861327
ya12983 mail co m
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tavis Ormandy <taviso@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 18:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <i6tttbF23qrU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #11874 |
On 2021-01-21, H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> wrote: > David Brown kirjutas neljapäev, 21. jaanuar 2021 kl 19:00:59 UTC+2: > > I have seen, that the code, that I posted was incomplete. > I am sorry for reporting you that. What is 2^4? You probably think it's 16, but try it. Why does JavaScript think it's 6? If you can't figure out it, read the previous reply I sent. Tavis. -- _o) $ lynx lock.cmpxchg8b.com /\\ _o) _o) $ finger taviso@sdf.org _\_V _( ) _( ) @taviso
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chovy <chovy@pm.me> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 10:11 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6009c3dd$0$34724$a92e2ab9@news.vipernews.com> |
| In reply to | #11874 |
On 1/21/21 9:29 AM, H E wrote:
> David Brown kirjutas neljapäev, 21. jaanuar 2021 kl 19:00:59 UTC+2:
>> On 21/01/2021 17:37, chovy wrote:
>>>
>>> go easy on the kid. lol
>>>
>>> i once had to learn how to do a table layout and if it weren't for #html
>>> on efnet I never would have gotten 30 years of webdev under my belt.
>>>
>> I /have/ gone easy on him. Have a look at the posts I've made to him,
>> and the posts he has made.
>>
>> (One thing good can be said about his posting - it has shown that there
>> are a few more lurkers in this group than I thought. If there are some
>> people who actually want to learn something, posting here could still be
>> worth the effort - as long as they don't let Amine and Kristjan scare
>> them away.)
>
>
> Hello guys.
>
> Nice to hear critics on me.
> I think it had some good points in it.
>
>
> I have seen, that the code, that I posted was incomplete.
> I am sorry for reporting you that.
> I copied it directly from "nano" in my manjaro linux. It cuts the ends away.
> The last line in "for cycle" is cutted.
>
> The full code:
>
> <html>
> <body>
> <div id="aa1" style="width: 100%; word-wrap: break-word;">
> </div>
> <script>
> var a1=0;
> var a2=54.32
> var a3=3.43;
> var a4=5.53;
> var a5=34.75;
> var a0001=-1;
> for(var i=0; i<2132; i++) {
> a0001=(-1)*a0001;
> var i01=i^1.914643966346+i^1.260774037134;
> a1=a5^1.206040306030407046073;
> a2=1.30461*a1^1.92423523;
> a3=3.470347*a2^1.3620346375;
> a4=2.306463*a3^1.5437347;
> a5=a0001*a4*i01^1.2643634704673;
> document.getElementById("aa1").append((a1^(2.04326974)-1.34634769432*a2^(3.5324986798213)+
> 1.43986739*a3^(4.23460181704968)-1.3489679834*a4^(5.120398567219386)+1.4869374986*a5^(6.280407732347245733547)));
> }
> var aa001=document.getElementById("aa1").innerHTML;
> aa001=aa001.replace(/\./g,'');
> aa001=aa001.replace(/\+/g,'');
> aa001=aa001.replace(/e/g,'');
> aa001=aa001.replace(/\-/g,'');
> document.getElementById("aa1").innerHTML=aa001;
> </script>
>
>
> </body>
> </html>
>
>
> Kr.
>
> 372 6861327
> ya12983 mail co m
>
Rather than paste code here its better to use a paste bin like x00.net
--
- chovy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 10:21 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8dc9d017-0dea-43ac-92f6-cc6f03ab7673n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #11879 |
To Tavis. You might be right. But when I look the results, they look just incredible. Kr.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tavis Ormandy <taviso@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 18:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <i6u02kF34toU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #11883 |
On 2021-01-21, H E <rob99999999999999999@gmail.com> wrote: > To Tavis. > > You might be right. > But when I look the results, they look just incredible. > How can you tell if a number is random or not? Is just looking random good enough? It's a really interesting question! You will find this really fascinating, read about Buffon's needle problem! I found you a fun video so you don't have to read anything: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHSWNsnJGeE Now, instead of throwing needles in the air, what if we use your random function? If it has the same statistical properties as throwing needeles in the air, it should work right? This is just a quick example of how to really evaluate a RNG (Random Number Generator), and why I was suggesting reading about diehard. Diehard is big collection of problems like this can check if the output has the right statistical properties. Tavis. -- _o) $ lynx lock.cmpxchg8b.com /\\ _o) _o) $ finger taviso@sdf.org _\_V _( ) _( ) @taviso
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-22 06:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rudri0$qpm$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #11879 |
On 21/01/2021 18:11, chovy wrote: > On 1/21/21 9:29 AM, H E wrote: <lots of code, which I've snipped> > Rather than paste code here its better to use a paste bin like x00.net If you truly believed that, you wouldn't have quoted the entirety of his code. But actually it's not the case. Historically, this group has always preferred those with code problems to post, *here*, a minimum complete program that exhibits the problem, together with a complete description of the problem and a list of the solutions already attempted. But they also prefer people with code problems to be capable of engaging in technical discussions, which "H E" (or whatever his name is) clearly isn't, which is why he's beginning to wind up in the killfiles of even the most patient souls. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-22 08:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <rue05a$h5e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #11899 |
On 22/01/2021 07:32, Richard Heathfield wrote: > On 21/01/2021 18:11, chovy wrote: >> On 1/21/21 9:29 AM, H E wrote: > > <lots of code, which I've snipped> > >> Rather than paste code here its better to use a paste bin like x00.net > > If you truly believed that, you wouldn't have quoted the entirety of his > code. > > But actually it's not the case. Historically, this group has always > preferred those with code problems to post, *here*, a minimum complete > program that exhibits the problem, together with a complete description > of the problem and a list of the solutions already attempted. We also prefer to see actual /code/ - meaning "programming source code", rather than "html code" or "indecipherable gibberish". The group is language agnostic. JavaScript is a programming language, and people can post about or ask about JavaScript. HTML and CSS are not programming languages, and are not on topic. There are plenty of other places for discussing them. > > But they also prefer people with code problems to be capable of engaging > in technical discussions, which "H E" (or whatever his name is) clearly > isn't, which is why he's beginning to wind up in the killfiles of even > the most patient souls. > You can always come back to your old C group. It hasn't changed much, though Rick is definitely getting more and more disconnected from reality. Still, the signal to noise ratio is better than here.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-22 09:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rue52u$g5m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #11902 |
On 22/01/2021 07:51, David Brown wrote: <snip> > You can always come back to your old C group. That sounds promising! > It hasn't changed much, Oh. In that case, there's not much point. If I wanted to discuss religion, I'd subscribe to a religion group. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-22 11:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <rue8fl$4c6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #11903 |
On 22/01/2021 10:15, Richard Heathfield wrote: > On 22/01/2021 07:51, David Brown wrote: > > <snip> > >> You can always come back to your old C group. > > That sounds promising! > >> It hasn't changed much, > > Oh. In that case, there's not much point. If I wanted to discuss > religion, I'd subscribe to a religion group. > No one ever discusses religion in religious groups (IME) - people just yell at each other. Discussion involves listening. There are not many religious discussions in the C and C++ groups either, but there are occasional religious threads. (There used to be religious discussions sometimes. Though they were off-topic, I sometimes enjoyed them - there are some people there who know a little about religious topics and are capable of discussion. It was a lot more interesting than a crackpot predicting Armageddon by the end of the month.) But mostly threads have been about unions, programming challenges, and the usual stuff. Plenty of pointless nonsense - but still far more relevant threads than you get in this group.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 09:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rugq6c$61c$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #11904 |
On 22/01/2021 10:13, David Brown wrote: > On 22/01/2021 10:15, Richard Heathfield wrote: >> On 22/01/2021 07:51, David Brown wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >>> You can always come back to your old C group. >> >> That sounds promising! >> >>> It hasn't changed much, >> >> Oh. In that case, there's not much point. If I wanted to discuss >> religion, I'd subscribe to a religion group. >> > > No one ever discusses religion in religious groups (IME) - people just > yell at each other. Discussion involves listening. > > There are not many religious discussions in the C and C++ groups either, > but there are occasional religious threads. It was in one such thread that I was berated in no uncertain terms (not by a passing religious nut but by a respected regular contributor) for mildly objecting to discussions of religion in clc. He was backed up by the group at large. For me personally, it was a tipping point - a place from which I could see no route back for clc. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 12:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ruh185$h2q$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #11963 |
On 23/01/2021 10:27, Richard Heathfield wrote: > On 22/01/2021 10:13, David Brown wrote: >> On 22/01/2021 10:15, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>> On 22/01/2021 07:51, David Brown wrote: >>> >>> <snip> >>> >>>> You can always come back to your old C group. >>> >>> That sounds promising! >>> >>>> It hasn't changed much, >>> >>> Oh. In that case, there's not much point. If I wanted to discuss >>> religion, I'd subscribe to a religion group. >>> >> >> No one ever discusses religion in religious groups (IME) - people just >> yell at each other. Discussion involves listening. >> >> There are not many religious discussions in the C and C++ groups either, >> but there are occasional religious threads. > > It was in one such thread that I was berated in no uncertain terms (not > by a passing religious nut but by a respected regular contributor) for > mildly objecting to discussions of religion in clc. He was backed up by > the group at large. For me personally, it was a tipping point - a place > from which I could see no route back for clc. > Fair enough - if you don't feel comfortable somewhere, it's time to move on. Sometimes it is appropriate to try to ignore the people or posts that bother you, other times it is simply not worth the effort. There are some posters in clc whose C knowledge I respect, but whom I find unpleasant people in discussions. (I've just updated my filters to remove more of "HE"'s junk, and as a side-effect I might have hidden this thread. So if you think there's more to be said here - and I think there probably isn't - you have my email address.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-23 12:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ruh3nv$1ck$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #11964 |
On 23/01/2021 11:28, David Brown wrote: > ... if you think there's > more to be said here - and I think there probably isn't - you have my > email address.) No, I think this discussion has run its course. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chovy <chovy@pm.me> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 10:11 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6009c3ad$0$34724$a92e2ab9@news.vipernews.com> |
| In reply to | #11873 |
On 1/21/21 9:00 AM, David Brown wrote: > On 21/01/2021 17:37, chovy wrote: >> >> go easy on the kid. lol >> >> i once had to learn how to do a table layout and if it weren't for #html >> on efnet I never would have gotten 30 years of webdev under my belt. >> > > I /have/ gone easy on him. Have a look at the posts I've made to him, > and the posts he has made. > > (One thing good can be said about his posting - it has shown that there > are a few more lurkers in this group than I thought. If there are some > people who actually want to learn something, posting here could still be > worth the effort - as long as they don't let Amine and Kristjan scare > them away.) > Anime is weird. I had a friend who was into it. Cartoon porn. Don't get. I guess I'm weird. -- - chovy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-01-21 20:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <rucm7l$am9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #11878 |
On 21/01/2021 19:11, chovy wrote: > On 1/21/21 9:00 AM, David Brown wrote: >> On 21/01/2021 17:37, chovy wrote: >>> >>> go easy on the kid. lol >>> >>> i once had to learn how to do a table layout and if it weren't for #html >>> on efnet I never would have gotten 30 years of webdev under my belt. >>> >> >> I /have/ gone easy on him. Have a look at the posts I've made to him, >> and the posts he has made. >> >> (One thing good can be said about his posting - it has shown that there >> are a few more lurkers in this group than I thought. If there are some >> people who actually want to learn something, posting here could still be >> worth the effort - as long as they don't let Amine and Kristjan scare >> them away.) >> > > Anime is weird. I had a friend who was into it. Cartoon porn. Don't get. > I guess I'm weird. > Amine, not Anime. He is one of the two twats in this group that makes vast numbers of meaningless and pointless posts, mostly in new threads saying exactly the same thing as they said in the last dozen threads. Neither he nor Kristjan pay any attention to what others post, and are so wrapped up in themselves that they have no consideration for anyone else in the group. Both think they are such geniuses that the rest of humanity is not worth bothering about. My request to both of them would be to get a blog or a facebook page - somewhere you can post your reams of drivel without bothering other people. And the day you decide you are interested in having an adult conversation about programming, then welcome back to comp.programming!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.programming
csiph-web