Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #674529 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-10-17 09:11 +0200 |
| Last post | 2026-10-17 18:57 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 192 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 09:11 +0200
Re: Words have power Truman Babichev <avbb@bi.ru> - 2026-10-17 09:58 +0000
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 13:08 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 18:25 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 16:32 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 18:46 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 16:49 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 18:55 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:04 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:14 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:18 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:21 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:23 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:29 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:31 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:36 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:38 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:44 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:46 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:55 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:57 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 20:09 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 23:39 +0000
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 19:03 -0700
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 07:50 +0200
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 11:24 -0700
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 20:44 +0200
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 12:02 -0700
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 21:54 +0200
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 13:31 -0700
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 22:45 +0200
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 15:56 -0700
Re: Words have power Russell Bahmutoff <sm@temar.ru> - 2026-10-17 19:17 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 22:19 +0200
Re: Words have power Fermin Ribakov <ifrbn@iobf.ru> - 2026-10-17 21:03 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 07:46 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 23:37 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 07:47 +0200
Re: Words have power Kevvy Ruzaev <vvavv@vrzrz.ru> - 2026-10-18 07:51 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 10:16 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:00 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 13:54 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:57 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 14:10 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:13 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 14:20 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:23 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 14:28 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:36 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 14:39 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:42 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 14:44 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 10:43 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 13:05 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:15 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 13:21 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:42 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 13:53 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:07 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 14:19 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:31 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 14:44 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:59 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 15:16 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 13:38 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 15:49 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 13:58 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 16:02 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 14:06 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 16:26 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 14:28 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 16:39 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 15:37 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 18:37 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:42 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 18:51 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:53 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 19:02 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:03 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 19:11 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:23 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 19:37 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 21:55 +0000
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 15:10 -0700
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 15:27 -0700
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 07:23 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 08:00 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 10:26 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 08:34 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 10:54 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 09:25 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 12:10 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:18 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 12:32 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:39 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 12:44 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:55 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 13:09 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 11:11 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 13:22 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 11:37 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 13:44 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 11:48 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 13:55 +0200
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 14:03 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 15:29 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 17:57 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 16:03 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 18:13 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 16:15 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 18:27 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 16:51 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 19:12 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 17:17 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 19:33 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 20:25 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 23:07 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:15 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 23:34 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:39 +0000
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:52 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-21 06:40 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-21 14:51 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-21 17:03 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-21 15:04 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-21 17:16 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-21 17:45 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-21 20:07 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-21 23:20 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 07:05 +0200
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 07:21 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 11:27 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 14:28 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:31 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 14:38 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 13:46 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 15:53 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 14:02 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 16:29 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:23 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 18:35 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 16:46 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 18:55 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 17:11 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 19:18 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 17:21 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 19:31 +0200
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 21:08 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 22:04 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 06:53 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 09:01 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 12:22 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:27 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 12:32 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:33 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 12:40 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:41 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 12:45 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:49 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 12:51 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:56 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:06 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:11 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:19 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:33 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:36 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:43 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:50 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:51 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:53 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:55 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:56 +0200
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 15:28 -0700
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 22:32 +0000
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 07:11 -0700
Re: Words have power Salvado Bazarov <avvazv@vzbb.ru> - 2026-10-19 19:07 +0000
Re: Words have power "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 14:39 -0700
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 04:58 -0700
Re: Words have power Dawn Rujenkov <jrdj@een.ru> - 2026-10-18 16:55 +0000
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 13:34 -0700
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 22:19 -0700
Re: Words have power nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-10-17 22:37 +0200
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 22:47 +0200
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 19:00 -0700
Re: Words have power nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-10-18 12:30 +0200
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 12:42 +0200
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 04:56 -0700
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 07:07 -0700
Re: Words have power nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-10-18 21:39 +0200
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 00:56 -0700
Re: Words have power (perspective geomtry) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 09:15 -0700
Re: Words have power (perspective geometry) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 18:57 -0700
Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10 Next page →
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 11:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <Yr9o0r7q9x7lhlam6DQ7hu03GSM@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674580 |
Le 18/10/2026 à 07:47, Maciej Woźniak a écrit :
> On 10/18/2026 1:37 AM, Python wrote:
>> Le 17/10/2026 à 22:19, Maciej Woźniak a écrit :
>>> On 10/17/2026 9:17 PM, Russell Bahmutoff wrote:
>>>> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/17/2026 8:24 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>> In other words, there is no Physics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> yous made it all up!
>>>>>
>>>>> Physics is a piece of objective software designed for a monkey's brain.
>>>>> And that it's made up doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
>>>>
>>>> very big truth once again, but it's only
>>>> objective because
>>>
>>> By objective I mean that.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming
>>
>>
>> So after several days of:
>>
>> "objective physics"
>> "objective reality"
>> "objective software"
>>
>> we finally learn that by "objective" you meant:
>>
>> object-oriented.
>
> Nope. Usually "objective" means something else.
> But when combined with "software" it's this meaning.
No. The adjective is:
object-oriented
not:
objective.
And the irony gets better.
Alan Kay, who actually coined "object-oriented", later said it was a
bad choice of term because it made people focus on the OBJECTS rather
than what he considered the important idea: MESSAGING.
His description of OOP was essentially:
messaging
hidden/local state
extreme late binding
He even famously remarked that when he invented "object-oriented", he
certainly did not have C++ in mind.
So:
"objective software" != object-oriented software
and:
"science contains objects"
!=
"science is object-oriented software".
By your reasoning, physics is OOP because it contains objects.
Presumably zoology is OOP because it contains animals, and a kitchen is
OOP because it contains forks.
You've managed to misunderstand "object-oriented" in almost exactly the
way the man who coined the term spent years warning people not to.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 13:54 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18df9da0edcd5435$8168$1970418$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674589 |
On 10/18/2026 1:00 PM, Python wrote: > Le 18/10/2026 à 07:47, Maciej Woźniak a écrit : >> On 10/18/2026 1:37 AM, Python wrote: >>> Le 17/10/2026 à 22:19, Maciej Woźniak a écrit : >>>> On 10/17/2026 9:17 PM, Russell Bahmutoff wrote: >>>>> Maciej Woźniak wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 10/17/2026 8:24 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>> In other words, there is no Physics. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> yous made it all up! >>>>>> >>>>>> Physics is a piece of objective software designed for a monkey's >>>>>> brain. >>>>>> And that it's made up doesn't mean it doesn't exist. >>>>> >>>>> very big truth once again, but it's only >>>>> objective because >>>> >>>> By objective I mean that. >>>> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming >>> >>> >>> So after several days of: >>> >>> "objective physics" >>> "objective reality" >>> "objective software" >>> >>> we finally learn that by "objective" you meant: >>> >>> object-oriented. >> >> Nope. Usually "objective" means something else. >> But when combined with "software" it's this meaning. > > No. The adjective is: > > object-oriented > > not: > > objective. So it must be "object oriented c" not "objective c", right, poor piece of shit?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 11:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <FW6wsHXLAp_4gXsSOkQLxZKg7G4@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674592 |
Le 18/10/2026 à 13:54, Maciej Woźniak a écrit :
> On 10/18/2026 1:00 PM, Python wrote:
>> Le 18/10/2026 à 07:47, Maciej Woźniak a écrit :
>>> On 10/18/2026 1:37 AM, Python wrote:
>>>> Le 17/10/2026 à 22:19, Maciej Woźniak a écrit :
>>>>> On 10/17/2026 9:17 PM, Russell Bahmutoff wrote:
>>>>>> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/17/2026 8:24 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>>>> In other words, there is no Physics.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> yous made it all up!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Physics is a piece of objective software designed for a monkey's
>>>>>>> brain.
>>>>>>> And that it's made up doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> very big truth once again, but it's only
>>>>>> objective because
>>>>>
>>>>> By objective I mean that.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So after several days of:
>>>>
>>>> "objective physics"
>>>> "objective reality"
>>>> "objective software"
>>>>
>>>> we finally learn that by "objective" you meant:
>>>>
>>>> object-oriented.
>>>
>>> Nope. Usually "objective" means something else.
>>> But when combined with "software" it's this meaning.
>>
>> No. The adjective is:
>>
>> object-oriented
>>
>> not:
>>
>> objective.
>
> So it must be "object oriented c" not "objective c", right,
> poor piece of shit?
:-)))))
"Objective-C" is the proper name of a programming language.
It does not make "objective software" a synonym for "object-oriented
software", any more than:
Java programmer = coffee programmer
Python code = snake code
C shell = seashell
Objective-C was specifically named as an object-oriented extension to C.
And names chosen for products, languages, trademarks or marketing are
not definitions in computer science.
Microsoft Windows does not establish that "windows software" means
"Microsoft software".
So your argument has now reached:
a programming language was named "Objective-C"
therefore "objective software" means "object-oriented software".
That's not CS terminology.
That's reverse-engineering a definition from a brand name.
At this rate, Burger King will soon become a constitutional monarchy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 14:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18df9e7f000897f3$9076$1964278$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674594 |
On 10/18/2026 1:57 PM, Python wrote: > Le 18/10/2026 à 13:54, Maciej Woźniak a écrit : >> On 10/18/2026 1:00 PM, Python wrote: >>> Le 18/10/2026 à 07:47, Maciej Woźniak a écrit : >>>> On 10/18/2026 1:37 AM, Python wrote: >>>>> Le 17/10/2026 à 22:19, Maciej Woźniak a écrit : >>>>>> On 10/17/2026 9:17 PM, Russell Bahmutoff wrote: >>>>>>> Maciej Woźniak wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 10/17/2026 8:24 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>> In other words, there is no Physics. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> yous made it all up! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Physics is a piece of objective software designed for a monkey's >>>>>>>> brain. >>>>>>>> And that it's made up doesn't mean it doesn't exist. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> very big truth once again, but it's only >>>>>>> objective because >>>>>> >>>>>> By objective I mean that. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So after several days of: >>>>> >>>>> "objective physics" >>>>> "objective reality" >>>>> "objective software" >>>>> >>>>> we finally learn that by "objective" you meant: >>>>> >>>>> object-oriented. >>>> >>>> Nope. Usually "objective" means something else. >>>> But when combined with "software" it's this meaning. >>> >>> No. The adjective is: >>> >>> object-oriented >>> >>> not: >>> >>> objective. >> >> So it must be "object oriented c" not "objective c", right, >> poor piece of shit? > > :-))))) > > > "Objective-C" is the proper name of a programming language. And it is obviously wrong name, right, poor piece of shit? Should be "object oriented c" instead?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 12:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <RCA6085yFsonoWNhX_e7lbyHYzY@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674596 |
Le 18/10/2026 à 14:10, Maciej Woźniak a écrit : > On 10/18/2026 1:57 PM, Python wrote: .. >> "Objective-C" is the proper name of a programming language. >> [argument snipped] > > And it is obviously wrong name, right, poor piece > of shit? Should be "object oriented c" instead? :-) I see why you snipped everything below the first two lines. The rest contained the answer. Excellent debating technique, though: remove the explanation, then triumphantly ask for the explanation. Object-oriented discussion, presumably, or objective discussion :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 14:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18df9f06594d001d$9883$1958670$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674597 |
On 10/18/2026 2:13 PM, Python wrote: > Le 18/10/2026 à 14:10, Maciej Woźniak a écrit : >> On 10/18/2026 1:57 PM, Python wrote: > .. >>> "Objective-C" is the proper name of a programming language. >>> [argument snipped] >> >> And it is obviously wrong name, right, poor piece >> of shit? Should be "object oriented c" instead? > > :-) > > I see why you snipped everything below the first two lines. Well, why to care about more mad mumble of a brainwashed idiot worshiping desynchronizing clocks. And, while "objective" is commonly used as asubstitute of object-oriented (vide our objective c) I won't insist on that. If you prefer your moronic physics to be a piece of object-oriented software - let it be.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 12:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <gSuUtN3Cs3LjBAYrjlTweXrFdhI@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674598 |
Maciej,
> If you prefer your moronic physics
> to be a piece of object-oriented software
> - let it be.
:-)))
MY physics?
Let's review who introduced this magnificent thesis:
"Physics is a piece of objective software
designed for a monkey's brain."
That was YOU.
Then YOU explained that "objective" meant "object-oriented".
And now, three posts later, it has somehow become MY claim that physics
is object-oriented software.
This is truly impressive.
You don't merely move the goalposts.
You leave them on my lawn and accuse me of having built them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 14:28 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18df9f7862d33be4$9884$1958670$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674599 |
On 10/18/2026 2:23 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> If you prefer your moronic physics >> to be a piece of object-oriented software >> - let it be. > > :-))) > > MY physics? Plural your. > Let's review who introduced this magnificent thesis: > > "Physics is a piece of objective software > designed for a monkey's brain." > > That was YOU. > > Then YOU explained that "objective" meant "object-oriented". > > And now, three posts later, it has somehow become MY claim that physics > is object-oriented software. Being an idiot you can't read, no surprise.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 12:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <wd8NPcmMe5ANylzAo6vK7JqT_es@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674600 |
This is getting into small-child-with-jam-all-over-his-face territory:
"I didn't eat the jam."
Maciej, YOU wrote:
"Physics is a piece of objective software"
YOU explained that "objective" meant "object-oriented".
And now "physics is object-oriented software" is somehow "your physics",
meaning everyone else's.
The empty jam jar is on the table.
The spoon is in your hand.
And there's jam all over your face.
But apparently we simply can't read.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 14:39 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18dfa01241a56da8$9077$1964278$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674601 |
On 10/18/2026 2:36 PM, Python wrote: > This is getting into small-child-with-jam-all-over-his-face territory: > > "I didn't eat the jam." > > Maciej, YOU wrote: > > "Physics is a piece of objective software" > > YOU explained that "objective" meant "object-oriented". > > And now "physics is object-oriented software" is somehow "your physics", > meaning everyone else's. I don't identify with brainwashing religions, it's yours.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 12:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4CJmSF9dVEIBoyZAZtiQlQ1Rm7w@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674602 |
> I don't identify with brainwashing religions,
> it's yours.
Nobody asked what you identify with.
YOU wrote:
"Physics is a piece of objective software"
YOU explained:
"objective" = "object-oriented"
And now the resulting proposition belongs to us because you don't
"identify" with physics.
The jam metaphor was perhaps too generous.
The child at least remembers eating it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-18 14:44 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18dfa05a34a996f9$9885$1958670$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674603 |
On 10/18/2026 2:42 PM, Python wrote: >> I don't identify with brainwashing religions, >> it's yours. > > Nobody asked what you identify with. > > YOU wrote: > > "Physics is a piece of objective software" > > YOU explained: > > "objective" = "object-oriented" > > And now the resulting proposition belongs to us because you don't > "identify" with physics. Your moronic physics IS a piece of object-oriented software - whether you like it or not, poor piece of shit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-19 10:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lAx-xnZ2MGt6JeyYHsvjsWL6reA@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674604 |
Maciej, > Your moronic physics IS a piece of object-oriented > software There we are. So it IS your thesis after all. The jam has made it back onto the bread. That was quite a journey.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-19 13:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18dfe984883c5570$8195$1970418$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674648 |
On 10/19/2026 12:43 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> Your moronic physics IS a piece of object-oriented >> software > > There we are. > > So it IS your thesis after all. Of course it's not yours, you're far, far, far too dumb for it, but your dumbness doesn't change the facts, poor piece of shit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-19 11:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <gOivVoKmNxUOS8HcfbtL0iTG6_Y@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674649 |
Le 19/10/2026 à 13:05, Maciej Woźniak a écrit :
> On 10/19/2026 12:43 PM, Python wrote:
>> Maciej,
>>
>>> Your moronic physics IS a piece of object-oriented
>>> software
>>
>> There we are.
>>
>> So it IS your thesis after all.
>
> Of course it's not yours, you're far, far,
> far too dumb for it, but your dumbness
> doesn't change the facts, poor piece of
> shit.
Fine. Let's examine your grand thesis itself:
"Physics is a piece of object-oriented software
designed for a monkey's brain."
What exactly makes physics "object-oriented software"?
Classes?
Objects?
Encapsulation?
Inheritance?
Polymorphism?
Message passing?
Late binding?
You have identified none of them.
Apparently your entire argument is:
physics talks about objects
object-oriented programming talks about objects
therefore physics is object-oriented software.
By the same reasoning, a furniture catalogue is object-oriented
software.
Calling this a "fact" doesn't supply the missing argument.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-19 13:21 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18dfea64cd8dcff0$8197$1970418$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674650 |
On 10/19/2026 1:15 PM, Python wrote: > Le 19/10/2026 à 13:05, Maciej Woźniak a écrit : >> On 10/19/2026 12:43 PM, Python wrote: >>> Maciej, >>> >>>> Your moronic physics IS a piece of object-oriented >>>> software >>> >>> There we are. >>> >>> So it IS your thesis after all. >> >> Of course it's not yours, you're far, far, >> far too dumb for it, but your dumbness >> doesn't change the facts, poor piece of >> shit. > > > Fine. Let's examine your grand thesis itself: > > "Physics is a piece of object-oriented software > designed for a monkey's brain." > > What exactly makes physics "object-oriented software"? Mostly - that uploaded to a brain of an idiot like yourself it is giving that brain new abilities.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-19 11:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <L5pNDZHpEuTtsMQ4K8AgNwE-WmU@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674651 |
> Mostly - that uploaded to a brain of an idiot
> like yourself it is giving that brain new
> abilities.
That doesn't make it object-oriented software.
It doesn't even make it software.
Learning arithmetic gives a child new abilities.
Learning Polish gives a child new abilities.
Learning chess gives a child new abilities.
Are arithmetic, Polish and chess all object-oriented software?
You started with an extravagant metaphor and, when asked what makes it
"object-oriented", supplied a property that has absolutely nothing to
do with object-oriented programming.
At this point "object-oriented software" just means:
something Maciej has decided to call object-oriented software.
A remarkably flexible branch of computer science.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-19 13:53 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18dfec239652b792$9119$1964278$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674652 |
On 10/19/2026 1:42 PM, Python wrote: >> Mostly - that uploaded to a brain of an idiot >> like yourself it is giving that brain new >> abilities. > > That doesn't make it object-oriented software. > > It doesn't even make it software. Sorry, poor piece of shit, that's exactly what is making it software. And "object oriented" - is because of its structure. > > Learning arithmetic gives a child new abilities. > Learning Polish gives a child new abilities. > Learning chess gives a child new abilities. > > Are arithmetic, Polish and chess all object-oriented software? > Exactly, poor piece of shit. There are many and deep differences between a human and a monkey, and analyzing the hardware is not explaining them at all. Why doubts? Can't AI deal with all of them? If it can, you should know: it's software.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-19 12:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <Xms1BqchXqnweeoDNd9B_T097As@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674653 |
Maciej,
> Exactly
Excellent. So now arithmetic, Polish and chess are literally software.
Your definition is apparently:
anything learned that gives a brain new abilities = software
That isn't a result from computer science. It's a metaphor you've
promoted to a definition.
And then:
> And "object oriented" - is because of its structure.
Ah, the long-awaited technical explanation:
because of its structure.
WHAT structure?
Object-oriented programming has identifiable structural concepts:
objects, encapsulated state/behaviour, message passing or method
dispatch, classes/prototypes depending on the model, polymorphism, etc.
You have identified precisely none of these.
> Can't AI deal with all of them? If it can, you should know:
> it's software.
A weather program can deal with hurricanes.
Therefore hurricanes are software?
A chess program can deal with chess, a translator with Polish, and a
CAS with arithmetic. That tells us something about what software can
REPRESENT and PROCESS, not what those things ARE.
You have quietly replaced:
software can process X
with:
X is software.
That's not computer science either.
It's the same category error, now automated.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-19 14:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18dfed8ab88f5ced$8198$1970418$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674654 |
On 10/19/2026 2:07 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> Exactly > > Excellent. So now arithmetic, Polish and chess are literally software. > > Your definition is apparently: > > anything learned that gives a brain new abilities = software Python, you shouldn't conclude, you're too stupid for that, and "software" has no definition. > > That isn't a result from computer science. It's a metaphor you've > promoted to a definition. > > And then: > >> And "object oriented" - is because of its structure. > > Ah, the long-awaited technical explanation: > > because of its structure. > > WHAT structure? > > Object-oriented programming has identifiable structural concepts: > objects, encapsulated state/behaviour, message passing or method > dispatch, classes/prototypes depending on the model, polymorphism, etc. > > You have identified precisely none of these. > >> Can't AI deal with all of them? If it can, you should know: >> it's software. > > A weather program can deal with hurricanes. > > Therefore hurricanes are software? > > A chess program can deal with chess, a translator with Polish, and a > CAS with arithmetic. That tells us something about what software can > REPRESENT and PROCESS, not what those things ARE. And what they ARE according to poor piece of shit Python? What is arithmetic? What is Polish [language]?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web