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

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #462248 > unrolled thread

nice planet

Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design

Contents

  nice planet John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-05-29 19:51 -0700
    Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-29 20:08 -0700
      Re: nice planet Rheilly Phoull <rheilly@bigslong.com> - 2017-05-30 11:51 +0800
        Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-29 23:49 -0700
          Re: nice planet Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2017-05-31 03:36 -0700
            Re: nice planet Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-05-31 20:11 +1000
              Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-31 04:59 -0700
                Re: nice planet Lightnin' <flashover@gmail.com> - 2017-05-31 06:34 -0700
              Re: nice planet John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-05-31 06:52 -0700
            Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-31 04:51 -0700
      Re: nice planet tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-29 22:33 -0700
        Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-29 23:56 -0700
          Re: nice planet tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-30 00:21 -0700
            Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-30 00:46 -0700
              Re: nice planet tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-05-30 06:09 -0700
          Re: nice planet "dcaster@krl.org" <dcaster@krl.org> - 2017-05-30 05:55 -0700
            Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-30 19:45 -0700
              Re: nice planet "dcaster@krl.org" <dcaster@krl.org> - 2017-05-31 05:27 -0700
                Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-31 16:56 -0700
            Re: nice planet jurb6006@gmail.com - 2017-05-31 00:31 -0700
              Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-31 00:44 -0700
              Re: nice planet krw@notreal.com - 2017-05-31 18:15 -0400
                Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-31 17:01 -0700
              Re: nice planet John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2017-05-31 16:08 -0700
                Re: nice planet Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-05-31 16:55 -0700
                  Re: nice planet Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-06-01 10:05 +1000
                    Re: nice planet Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-05-31 17:53 -0700
                      Re: nice planet Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-06-01 10:24 +1000
                        Re: nice planet Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2017-05-31 18:08 -0700
                          Re: nice planet Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-06-01 10:43 +1000
                          Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-31 18:20 -0700
                          Re: nice planet John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> - 2017-05-31 18:27 -0700
                          Re: nice planet John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> - 2017-05-31 19:47 -0700
                        Re: nice planet pcdhobbs@gmail.com - 2017-05-31 18:16 -0700
                          Re: nice planet Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-06-01 10:55 +1000
                            Re: nice planet pcdhobbs@gmail.com - 2017-05-31 18:44 -0700
                          Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-31 18:33 -0700
                            Re: nice planet Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-06-01 11:03 +1000
                  Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-31 17:45 -0700
                Re: nice planet bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-05-31 17:42 -0700
    Re: nice planet Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-05-30 01:21 -0800
    Re: nice planet amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2017-05-30 07:33 -0500
      Re: nice planet John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-05-30 07:30 -0700
        Re: nice planet habib <h.bouazizviallet@free.fr> - 2017-05-30 18:21 +0200
          Re: nice planet John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-05-30 09:47 -0700
            Re: nice planet habib <h.bouazizviallet@free.fr> - 2017-05-30 19:36 +0200
              Re: nice planet John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2017-05-31 10:51 -0700
            Re: nice planet bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com - 2017-05-30 11:17 -0700
              Re: nice planet John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> - 2017-05-31 12:46 -0700
      Re: nice planet Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-30 15:42 +0100
        Re: nice planet amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2017-05-30 13:08 -0500
      Re: nice planet rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 16:18 -0400
    Re: nice planet Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-05-30 14:30 +0100
    Re: nice planet Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-05-30 09:01 -0700
      Re: nice planet John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-05-30 09:53 -0700

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#462248 — nice planet

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG


-- 

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#462249

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 12:51:18 PM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG

Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet.

John Larkin doesn't understand the different between weather and climate, so I suppose to makes sense that he thinks that a small (and none-too-representative) sample of a planetary surface may serve to characterise the planet as a whole.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney 

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

#462253

On 5/30/17 11:08 AM, bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 12:51:18 PM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
> 
> Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet.
> 
> John Larkin doesn't understand the different between weather and climate, so I suppose to makes sense that he thinks that a small (and none-too-representative) sample of a planetary surface may serve to characterise the planet as a whole.
> 

Lighten up Bill :)

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

#462262

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 1:50:59 PM UTC+10, Rheilly Phoull wrote:
> On 5/30/17 11:08 AM, bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 12:51:18 PM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
> >> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
> > 
> > Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet.
> > 
> > John Larkin doesn't understand the different between weather and climate, so I suppose to makes sense that he thinks that a small (and none-too-representative) sample of a planetary surface may serve to characterise the planet as a whole. 
> 
> Lighten up Bill :)

Fair comment. I'd like to be funnier, but comedy is tricky.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

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

#462403

bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote...
> Rheilly Phoull wrote:
>> bill.sloman wrote:
>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
>>> 
>>> Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet. ...
>> 
>> Lighten up Bill :)
>
> Fair comment. I'd like to be funnier, but comedy is tricky.

 Musta gotten up on the wrong side of the bed to have a dour
 attitude upon seeing an awesome double rainbow / snowbow!


-- 
 Thanks,
    - Win

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

#462404

On 31/05/17 20:36, Winfield Hill wrote:
> bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote...
>> Rheilly Phoull wrote:
>>> bill.sloman wrote:
>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
>>>>
>>>> Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet. ...
>>>
>>> Lighten up Bill :)
>>
>> Fair comment. I'd like to be funnier, but comedy is tricky.
>
>  Musta gotten up on the wrong side of the bed to have a dour
>  attitude upon seeing an awesome double rainbow / snowbow!

I think Bill is just sour whenever he contemplates
someone who is clearly enjoying making worthwhile
things that earns enough to give them the financial
independence and supports a pleasant lifestyle.
Especially someone who often takes this wonderful
planet's beneficence for granted.

Let's not forget though...

There is no Planet B.

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

#462407

On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 8:46:09 PM UTC+10, Clifford Heath wrote:
> On 31/05/17 20:36, Winfield Hill wrote:
> > bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote...
> >> Rheilly Phoull wrote:
> >>> bill.sloman wrote:
> >>>> John Larkin wrote:
> >>>>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
> >>>>
> >>>> Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet. ...
> >>>
> >>> Lighten up Bill :)
> >>
> >> Fair comment. I'd like to be funnier, but comedy is tricky.
> >
> >  Musta gotten up on the wrong side of the bed to have a dour
> >  attitude upon seeing an awesome double rainbow / snowbow!
> 
> I think Bill is just sour whenever he contemplates
> someone who is clearly enjoying making worthwhile
> things that earns enough to give them the financial
> independence and supports a pleasant lifestyle.

Can't say I can see much of that in my attitude. I've got financial independence, a lifestyle I find pleasant, and  I've made a few worthwhile things in my time, most of them an order magnitude or two more complicated than John Larkin's "complete the design in a fornight" products.

> Especially someone who often takes this wonderful
> planet's beneficence for granted.

John Larkin doesn't just take the planet's beneficence for granted - he swallows great chunks of self-serving propaganda that claims that the planet is a whole lot more beneficent and abuse tolerant than it actually is.

> Let's not forget though...
> 
> There is no Planet B.

Amen.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

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

#462415

On 05/31/2017 04:59 AM, bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:
>
> John Larkin doesn't just take the planet's beneficence for granted - he swallows great chunks of self-serving propaganda that claims that the planet is a whole lot more beneficent and abuse tolerant than it actually is.
>
>> Let's not forget though...
>>
>> There is no Planet B.
>
> Amen.

As Aldo Leopold—perhaps America’s most famous naturalist—noted,
     “If the biota, in the course of aeons, has built something we like 
but do not understand, then who but a fool would discard seemingly 
useless parts? To keep every cog and wheel is the first precaution of 
intelligent tinkering.”

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

#462416

On Wed, 31 May 2017 20:11:27 +1000, Clifford Heath
<no.spam@please.net> wrote:

>On 31/05/17 20:36, Winfield Hill wrote:
>> bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote...
>>> Rheilly Phoull wrote:
>>>> bill.sloman wrote:
>>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
>>>>>
>>>>> Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet. ...
>>>>
>>>> Lighten up Bill :)
>>>
>>> Fair comment. I'd like to be funnier, but comedy is tricky.
>>
>>  Musta gotten up on the wrong side of the bed to have a dour
>>  attitude upon seeing an awesome double rainbow / snowbow!
>
>I think Bill is just sour whenever he contemplates
>someone who is clearly enjoying making worthwhile
>things that earns enough to give them the financial
>independence and supports a pleasant lifestyle.
>Especially someone who often takes this wonderful
>planet's beneficence for granted.
>

You don't need much income to appreciate the sky. And even someone who
compulsively designs electronics can take a break on a holiday
weekend, and look up instead of down.

>Let's not forget though...
>
>There is no Planet B.

-- 

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics 

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

#462406

On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 8:36:44 PM UTC+10, Winfield Hill wrote:
> bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote...
> > Rheilly Phoull wrote:
> >> bill.sloman wrote:
> >>> John Larkin wrote:
> >>>>https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
> >>> 
> >>> Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet. ...
> >> 
> >> Lighten up Bill :)
> >
> > Fair comment. I'd like to be funnier, but comedy is tricky.
> 
>  Musta gotten up on the wrong side of the bed to have a dour
>  attitude upon seeing an awesome double rainbow / snowbow!

Didn't notice it at all, which is a bit embarrassing.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

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

#462258

On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 04:08:30 UTC+1, bill....@ieee.org  wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 12:51:18 PM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
> > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
> 
> Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet.
> 
> John Larkin doesn't understand the different between weather and climate, so I suppose to makes sense that he thinks that a small (and none-too-representative) sample of a planetary surface may serve to characterise the planet as a whole.

Boy do you talk some rubbish.

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

#462263

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 3:34:04 PM UTC+10, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 04:08:30 UTC+1, bill....@ieee.org  wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 12:51:18 PM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
> > > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
> > 
> > Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet.
> > 
> > John Larkin doesn't understand the different between weather and climate, so I suppose to makes sense that he thinks that a small (and none-too-representative) sample of a planetary surface may serve to characterise the planet as a whole.
> 
> Boy do you talk some rubbish.

Boy John Larkin does post some irrelevant rubbish, and didn't even bother putting an Off Topic in the subject line. Some kind of put-down seemed to be called for. Sorry the point wasn't obvious to you, but I do aim at slightly more intelligent readers than you - there are a lot more of them. Feel free to tell us when you can't recognise what is going on - we'll make the appropriate allowance when we read you stuff, if we bother.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

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

#462268

On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 07:56:56 UTC+1, bill....@ieee.org  wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 3:34:04 PM UTC+10, tabby wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 04:08:30 UTC+1, bill....@ieee.org  wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 12:51:18 PM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:

> > > > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
> > > 
> > > Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet.
> > > 
> > > John Larkin doesn't understand the different between weather and climate, so I suppose to makes sense that he thinks that a small (and none-too-representative) sample of a planetary surface may serve to characterise the planet as a whole.
> > 
> > Boy do you talk some rubbish.
> 
> Boy John Larkin does post some irrelevant rubbish, and didn't even bother putting an Off Topic in the subject line. Some kind of put-down seemed to be called for. Sorry the point wasn't obvious to you, but I do aim at slightly more intelligent readers than you - there are a lot more of them. Feel free to tell us when you can't recognise what is going on - we'll make the appropriate allowance when we read you stuff, if we bother.

The only person you put down with your childish posts is yourself.

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

#462269

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 5:21:17 PM UTC+10, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 07:56:56 UTC+1, bill....@ieee.org  wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 3:34:04 PM UTC+10, tabby wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 04:08:30 UTC+1, bill....@ieee.org  wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 12:51:18 PM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
> 
> > > > > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
> > > > 
> > > > Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet.
> > > > 
> > > > John Larkin doesn't understand the different between weather and climate, so I suppose to makes sense that he thinks that a small (and none-too-representative) sample of a planetary surface may serve to characterise the planet as a whole.
> > > 
> > > Boy do you talk some rubbish.
> > 
> > Boy John Larkin does post some irrelevant rubbish, and didn't even bother putting an Off Topic in the subject line. Some kind of put-down seemed to be called for. Sorry the point wasn't obvious to you, but I do aim at slightly more intelligent readers than you - there are a lot more of them. Feel free to tell us when you can't recognise what is going on - we'll make the appropriate allowance when we read you stuff, if we bother.
> 
> The only person you put down with your childish posts is yourself.

That's your opinion. I might say the same thing, but then again, there isn't much for me to put down, so why should I bother?

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

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

#462284

On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 08:46:26 UTC+1, bill....@ieee.org  wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 5:21:17 PM UTC+10, tabby wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 07:56:56 UTC+1, bill....@ieee.org  wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 3:34:04 PM UTC+10, tabby wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 04:08:30 UTC+1, bill....@ieee.org  wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 12:51:18 PM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:


> > > > > > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Truckee/PCD_2017/Squaw_Double_2017.JPG
> > > > > 
> > > > > Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet.
> > > > > 
> > > > > John Larkin doesn't understand the different between weather and climate, so I suppose to makes sense that he thinks that a small (and none-too-representative) sample of a planetary surface may serve to characterise the planet as a whole.
> > > > 
> > > > Boy do you talk some rubbish.
> > > 
> > > Boy John Larkin does post some irrelevant rubbish, and didn't even bother putting an Off Topic in the subject line. Some kind of put-down seemed to be called for. Sorry the point wasn't obvious to you, but I do aim at slightly more intelligent readers than you - there are a lot more of them. Feel free to tell us when you can't recognise what is going on - we'll make the appropriate allowance when we read you stuff, if we bother.
> > 
> > The only person you put down with your childish posts is yourself.
> 
> That's your opinion. I might say the same thing, but then again, there isn't much for me to put down, so why should I bother?

you remind us how childish you are once again. And I'm sure you will again.


NT

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

#462282

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 2:56:56 AM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

> > > Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet.
> > >

I did not notice that John Larkin claimed it was a comprehensive sample.  But it does not need to be that in order for  the earth to be a nice planet.

 


> 
> Boy John Larkin does post some irrelevant rubbish, and didn't even bother putting an Off Topic in the subject line. Some kind of put-down seemed to be called for. Sorry the point wasn't obvious to you, but I do aim at slightly more intelligent readers than you - there are a lot more of them. Feel free to tell us when you can't recognise what is going on - we'll make the appropriate allowance when we read you stuff, if we bother.
> 
> -- 
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

Some of the people here are intelligent enough to realize a post labeled " nice planet "  is not going to be on topic.  Only a person of little intellect would feel obliged to point that out.





Some kind of put-down seemed to be called for.

Why?  Any intelligent reader does not need help in comprehending.  Yet you think it is your responsibility tell them what is obvious.

                                            Dan

> 
> -- 
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

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

#462388

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 10:55:52 PM UTC+10, dca...@krl.org wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 2:56:56 AM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> 
> > > > Not exactly a comprehensive sample of one particular planet.
> 
> I did not notice that John Larkin claimed it was a comprehensive sample.  But it does not need to be that in order for  the earth to be a nice planet.

The subject line is "nice planet", not "nice snowfield".

> > Boy John Larkin does post some irrelevant rubbish, and didn't even bother putting an Off Topic in the subject line. Some kind of put-down seemed to be called for. Sorry the point wasn't obvious to you, but I do aim at slightly more intelligent readers than you - there are a lot more of them. Feel free to tell us when you can't recognise what is going on - we'll make the appropriate allowance when we read you stuff, if we bother.
> 
> Some of the people here are intelligent enough to realize a post labeled " nice planet "  is not going to be on topic.  Only a person of little intellect would feel obliged to point that out.

Perhaps. But one would imagine that more of the planet would be involved than one isolated snowfield. A planet (or at least the one we live on) offers a wide variety of environments, and a single snowfield isn't a represemntative sajmple

> Some kind of put-down seemed to be called for.
> 
> Why?  Any intelligent reader does not need help in comprehending.  Yet you think it is your responsibility tell them what is obvious.

Wrong. I'm just being snotty about John Larkin's posting habits. I won't cure him, but I may move his triviality threshold up a bit - he is probably still our most profligate poster, and when he posts more stuff than Phil Hobbs or Win Hill something is definitely out of kilter.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

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

#462410

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 10:45:38 PM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > >
> 
> Perhaps. But one would imagine that more of the planet would be involved than one isolated snowfield. A planet (or at least the one we live on) offers a wide variety of environments, and a single snowfield isn't a represemntative sajmple
> 
> 
> -- 
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

By that reasoning, a post with the title of " Beautiful  Woman "  ought to be a 
represemntative sajmple of women.

                                  Dan

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

#462502

On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at 10:28:02 PM UTC+10, dca...@krl.org wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 10:45:38 PM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > >
> > 
> > Perhaps. But one would imagine that more of the planet would be involved than one isolated snowfield. A planet (or at least the one we live on) offers a wide variety of environments, and a single snowfield isn't a represemntative sajmple
> 
> By that reasoning, a post with the title of " Beautiful  Woman "  ought to be  
> a representative sample of women.

Not exactly. If the picture presented an image that covered a representative sample of the whole woman - a full length portrait - nobody is going to quibble about not being able to her other side. You 'd expect to be able to recognise an individual woman from the image.

John Larkin's example represented a very small portion of the planet - closer to  presenting the image of an individual hair follicle and labelling it as "nice woman".

You really should check with whoever it is looks after you before exposing your cognitive deficit to the public. 

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

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

#462398

>"I did not notice that John Larkin claimed it was a comprehensive sample. "

When Slowman assumes, he is always right. It's an Aussie thing I think. I am running across more and more of them who think they know what is best for the US. 

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

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design

csiph-web