RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Robb, Sam]

> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Robb, Sam wrote:
> 
> > >   In science, we have this wonderful concept, called "evidence".
> > > Observation generates evidence; faith does not.
> >
> > Nonsense.  Faith is based on evidence.  Tell me - do you think that
> > the sun will come up tomorrow?  Yes?  That's faith.  You have your
> > observations, some evidence, and you extrapolate from that to reach
> > a conclusion about something you have yet to observe or experience.
> 
> Sam, with all due respect, I believe you're addressing the 
> later point by
> this rejoinder, rather than the lines you quoted.

It took me a couple of re-readings to see what you were saying, but
yes, you're right.  My apologies.  I was trying to point out that
while (as Dave said) faith doesn't create evidence, accepting that
evidence requires faith, and basing an expectation on that evidence
requires faith.

> You can hardly argue
> with the fact that observation does indeed generate evidence (in fact,
> "evidence" is just "observation" translated), and that faith 
> is generally
> associated with lack of evidence (because otherwise it would 
> be called a
> "scientific conclusion").

No argument from me, believe it or not.  I think that the modern idea
of "faith" as "warm fuzzies" is the antithesis of Biblical faith.

I will point out that you are making what I think is a mistake, and
assuming that observation is identical with (and exclusive to) science.
A witness testifying in court is an observer, and jurors are asked to
evaluate and either believe or disbelieve their testimony.  If someone
expresses doubt, you might tell them, "Trust me" - i.e., you are reminding
them that they can have faith in you, something that is based on their
knowledge of you and past expereinces with you. Human beings are used
to dealing with and expressing faith, and basing their faith on observation
and experience - either their own, or commutatively via their faith in
others (based on their observations of them, etc., etc., - ad infinitum).
 
> Now, being an agnostic, I'm not taking sides here.  In fact, I would
> classify faith into two categories: "honest faith", which is really a
> deeply believed theory that's doesn't contradict what little evidence
> there is, and "blind faith", which is belief in something contrary to
> unambiguously interpretable exising evidence[*].
...
> FWIW, I (and most people) see nothing wrong with "honest faith".  It's
> "blind faith" that's mostly argued about.

(I like the footnote, by the way :-)

Again, agreed.  My general gripe is that the modern usage of "faith" is
almost always in the sense of "blind faith"; so anyone who expresses
some measure of "faith" is, by implication, an unquestioning dolt with
all the mental agility and tact of an disgruntled hippo[*].

-Samrobb

[*] OK, I admit it.  I fel left out of the whole hippo thread thing.

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Robb, Sam wrote:

> > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Robb, Sam wrote:
> >
> > > >   In science, we have this wonderful concept, called "evidence".
> > > > Observation generates evidence; faith does not.
> > >
> > > Nonsense.  Faith is based on evidence.  Tell me - do you think that
> > > the sun will come up tomorrow?  Yes?  That's faith.  You have your
> > > observations, some evidence, and you extrapolate from that to reach
> > > a conclusion about something you have yet to observe or experience.
> >
> > Sam, with all due respect, I believe you're addressing the later point
> > by this rejoinder, rather than the lines you quoted.
>
> It took me a couple of re-readings to see what you were saying, but

Uh, yes, that should've probably said "rather than the lines you quoted
above" or something like that...

> yes, you're right.  My apologies.  I was trying to point out that
> while (as Dave said) faith doesn't create evidence, accepting that
> evidence requires faith, and basing an expectation on that evidence
> requires faith.
>
> > You can hardly argue with the fact that observation does indeed
> > generate evidence (in fact, "evidence" is just "observation"
> > translated), and that faith is generally associated with lack of
> > evidence (because otherwise it would be called a "scientific
> > conclusion").
>
> No argument from me, believe it or not.  I think that the modern idea
> of "faith" as "warm fuzzies" is the antithesis of Biblical faith.
>
> I will point out that you are making what I think is a mistake, and
> assuming that observation is identical with (and exclusive to) science.

I don't believe I've mentioned science anywhere in the above quoted
text...  The discussion was entirely about the relationship between
observation, evidence, and faith.  The little bit that did mention science
was quoted from Dave's message, and even there, science was only a
referent to the concept of evidence (which, as you mentioned, isn't
exclusive to science).  Perhaps the word "facts" should be inserted there
somewhere as well (as in, "evidence reflects facts", for example).

> A witness testifying in court is an observer, and jurors are asked to
> evaluate and either believe or disbelieve their testimony.  If someone
> expresses doubt, you might tell them, "Trust me" - i.e., you are
> reminding them that they can have faith in you, something that is based
> on their knowledge of you and past expereinces with you. Human beings
> are used to dealing with and expressing faith, and basing their faith on
> observation and experience - either their own, or commutatively via
> their faith in others (based on their observations of them, etc., etc.,
> - ad infinitum).

Yes.  I was actually tempted to quote Heinlein on the nature of human
beings in the previous message...

> [*] OK, I admit it.  I fel left out of the whole hippo thread thing.

Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Apr 20 17:00, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Robb, Sam wrote:
> > [*] OK, I admit it.  I fel left out of the whole hippo thread thing.
> 
> Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
> 	Igor

I'm under the impression you're a hippochondriac.


Corinna

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Apr 20 17:00, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Robb, Sam wrote:
> > > [*] OK, I admit it.  I fel left out of the whole hippo thread thing.
> >
> > Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
> > 	Igor
>
> I'm under the impression you're a hippochondriac.

If I don't stop laughing now, I'll die of hippoxia.  If that makes me a
hippochondriac, so be it!
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Apr 20 17:43, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> 
> > On Apr 20 17:00, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Robb, Sam wrote:
> > > > [*] OK, I admit it.  I fel left out of the whole hippo thread thing.
> > >
> > > Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
> > > 	Igor
> >
> > I'm under the impression you're a hippochondriac.
> 
> If I don't stop laughing now, I'll die of hippoxia.

Be careful.  Even if you don't die, it could seriously damage your
hippothalamus.


Corinna

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Apr 20 17:43, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >
> > > On Apr 20 17:00, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Robb, Sam wrote:
> > > > > [*] OK, I admit it.  I fel left out of the whole hippo thread thing.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
> > > > 	Igor
> > >
> > > I'm under the impression you're a hippochondriac.
> >
> > If I don't stop laughing now, I'll die of hippoxia.
>
> Be careful.  Even if you don't die, it could seriously damage your
> hippothalamus.

Such hippocrisy[*]...
	Igor
[*] According to "aspell", we have about 3 words left before we start
repeating ourselves. :-)
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Apr 20 18:23, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Apr 20 17:43, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > > On Apr 20 17:00, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > > > > Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
> > > > I'm under the impression you're a hippochondriac.
> > > If I don't stop laughing now, I'll die of hippoxia.
> > Be careful.  Even if you don't die, it could seriously damage your
> > hippothalamus.
> Such hippocrisy[*]...
> 	Igor
> [*] According to "aspell", we have about 3 words left before we start
> repeating ourselves. :-)

Really?  You're kidding.  Let's see...

  hippoglycemic
  hippomania
  hippotenuse

[time passes]

  hippobolic
  hippo-ventilating

[more time passes]

  hippo-threading

[a lot of time passes]

  hippi			<- A hippo with long hair
  

Huh!

Corinna

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Corinna Vinschen
>Sent: 21 April 2005 13:00

> On Apr 20 18:23, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> On Apr 20 17:43, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>> On Apr 20 17:00, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
>>>>> I'm under the impression you're a hippochondriac.
>>>> If I don't stop laughing now, I'll die of hippoxia.
>>> Be careful.  Even if you don't die, it could seriously damage your
>>> hippothalamus.
>> Such hippocrisy[*]...
>> 	Igor
>> [*] According to "aspell", we have about 3 words left before we start
>> repeating ourselves. :-)
> 
> Really?  You're kidding.  Let's see...
> 
>   hippoglycemic
>   hippomania
>   hippotenuse
> 
> [time passes]
> 
>   hippobolic
>   hippo-ventilating
> 
> [more time passes]
> 
>   hippo-threading
> 
> [a lot of time passes]
> 
>   hippi			<- A hippo with long hair
> 
> 
> Huh!
> 
> Corinna



Q.  What's bad-tempered, short-sighted, always complaining about things,
deeply dishonest with itself, and contains enough enriched uranium to
undergo spontaneous nuclear fission?


A.  Hippo-critical mass!


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 02:50:07PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>Q.  What's bad-tempered, short-sighted, always complaining about things,
>deeply dishonest with itself, and contains enough enriched uranium to
>undergo spontaneous nuclear fission?
>
>
>A.  Hippo-critical mass!

It is hard to keep up with the hippo frenetic posting in this mailing
list.

cgf

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Christopher Faylor
>Sent: 21 April 2005 15:14

> On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 02:50:07PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>> Q.  What's bad-tempered, short-sighted, always complaining about things,
>> deeply dishonest with itself, and contains enough enriched uranium to
>> undergo spontaneous nuclear fission?
>> 
>> 
>> A.  Hippo-critical mass!
> 
> It is hard to keep up with the hippo frenetic posting in this mailing
> list.
> 
> cgf


  I was hippo-active as a child!



    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Apr 20 18:23, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > On Apr 20 17:43, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > > > On Apr 20 17:00, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > > > > > Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
> > > > > I'm under the impression you're a hippochondriac.
> > > > If I don't stop laughing now, I'll die of hippoxia.
> > > Be careful.  Even if you don't die, it could seriously damage your
> > > hippothalamus.
> > Such hippocrisy[*]...
> > 	Igor
> > [*] According to "aspell", we have about 3 words left before we start
> > repeating ourselves. :-)
>
> Really?  You're kidding.  Let's see...
>
>   hippoglycemic
>   hippomania
>   hippotenuse
>
> [time passes]
>
>   hippobolic
>   hippo-ventilating
>
> [more time passes]
>
>   hippo-threading
>
> [a lot of time passes]
>
>   hippi			<- A hippo with long hair
>
> Huh!

And how many of those are words you'd use in a normal conversation?
I meant "hippoglycemic", "hippotenuse", and "hippie".  Everything else
seems contrived.
	Igor
P.S. Why would anyone want "hypothreading"? :-D
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Igor Pechtchanski
>Sent: 21 April 2005 18:04

> On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> 
>> On Apr 20 18:23, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>> On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>> On Apr 20 17:43, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>>> On Apr 20 17:00, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>>>>> Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
>>>>>> I'm under the impression you're a hippochondriac.
>>>>> If I don't stop laughing now, I'll die of hippoxia.
>>>> Be careful.  Even if you don't die, it could seriously damage your
>>>> hippothalamus.
>>> Such hippocrisy[*]...
>>> 	Igor
>>> [*] According to "aspell", we have about 3 words left before we start
>>> repeating ourselves. :-)
>> 
>> Really?  You're kidding.  Let's see...
>> 
>>   hippoglycemic
>>   hippomania
>>   hippotenuse
>> 
>> [time passes]
>> 
>>   hippobolic
>>   hippo-ventilating
>> 
>> [more time passes]
>> 
>>   hippo-threading
>> 
>> [a lot of time passes]
>> 
>>   hippi			<- A hippo with long hair
>> 
>> Huh!
> 
> And how many of those are words you'd use in a normal conversation?
> I meant "hippoglycemic", "hippotenuse", and "hippie".  Everything else
> seems contrived.


  Look into my eyes...... you are feeling sleepy.... very sleepy..... the
puns do not seem contrived..... repeat after me..... the puns do not seem
contrived.

  Now, when I click my fingers you will wake up.

  You will feel refreshed and well-rested.



  ... and of course, you will remember nothing of being hipponotized!

> 	Igor
> P.S. Why would anyone want "hypothreading"? :-D

  Well, you can never have too much threading, or too many hippos!

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Danilo Turina]

Too many hippos!!!!!!!!

Now I want to stop reading e-mails and I want to listen to some music...

...hip(po) hop(po) for example!

Dave Korn wrote:
> ----Original Message----
> 
>>From: Igor Pechtchanski
>>Sent: 21 April 2005 18:04
> 
> 
>>On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Apr 20 18:23, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Apr 20 17:43, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Apr 20 17:00, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm under the impression you're a hippochondriac.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If I don't stop laughing now, I'll die of hippoxia.
>>>>>
>>>>>Be careful.  Even if you don't die, it could seriously damage your
>>>>>hippothalamus.
>>>>
>>>>Such hippocrisy[*]...
>>>>	Igor
>>>>[*] According to "aspell", we have about 3 words left before we start
>>>>repeating ourselves. :-)
>>>
>>>Really?  You're kidding.  Let's see...
>>>
>>>  hippoglycemic
>>>  hippomania
>>>  hippotenuse
>>>
>>>[time passes]
>>>
>>>  hippobolic
>>>  hippo-ventilating
>>>
>>>[more time passes]
>>>
>>>  hippo-threading
>>>
>>>[a lot of time passes]
>>>
>>>  hippi			<- A hippo with long hair
>>>
>>>Huh!
>>
>>And how many of those are words you'd use in a normal conversation?
>>I meant "hippoglycemic", "hippotenuse", and "hippie".  Everything else
>>seems contrived.
> 
> 
> 
>   Look into my eyes...... you are feeling sleepy.... very sleepy..... the
> puns do not seem contrived..... repeat after me..... the puns do not seem
> contrived.
> 
>   Now, when I click my fingers you will wake up.
> 
>   You will feel refreshed and well-rested.
> 
> 
> 
>   ... and of course, you will remember nothing of being hipponotized!
> 
> 
>>	Igor
>>P.S. Why would anyone want "hypothreading"? :-D
> 
> 
>   Well, you can never have too much threading, or too many hippos!
> 
>     cheers,
>       DaveK

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Danilo Turina]

Too many hippos!!!!!!!!

Now I want to stop reading e-mails and I want to listen to some music...

...hip(po) hop(po) for example!

Dave Korn wrote:
> ----Original Message----
> 
>>From: Igor Pechtchanski
>>Sent: 21 April 2005 18:04
> 
> 
>>On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Apr 20 18:23, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Apr 20 17:43, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Apr 20 17:00, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Yes, now back to our regularly scheduled hippos...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm under the impression you're a hippochondriac.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If I don't stop laughing now, I'll die of hippoxia.
>>>>>
>>>>>Be careful.  Even if you don't die, it could seriously damage your
>>>>>hippothalamus.
>>>>
>>>>Such hippocrisy[*]...
>>>>	Igor
>>>>[*] According to "aspell", we have about 3 words left before we start
>>>>repeating ourselves. :-)
>>>
>>>Really?  You're kidding.  Let's see...
>>>
>>>  hippoglycemic
>>>  hippomania
>>>  hippotenuse
>>>
>>>[time passes]
>>>
>>>  hippobolic
>>>  hippo-ventilating
>>>
>>>[more time passes]
>>>
>>>  hippo-threading
>>>
>>>[a lot of time passes]
>>>
>>>  hippi			<- A hippo with long hair
>>>
>>>Huh!
>>
>>And how many of those are words you'd use in a normal conversation?
>>I meant "hippoglycemic", "hippotenuse", and "hippie".  Everything else
>>seems contrived.
> 
> 
> 
>   Look into my eyes...... you are feeling sleepy.... very sleepy..... the
> puns do not seem contrived..... repeat after me..... the puns do not seem
> contrived.
> 
>   Now, when I click my fingers you will wake up.
> 
>   You will feel refreshed and well-rested.
> 
> 
> 
>   ... and of course, you will remember nothing of being hipponotized!
> 
> 
>>	Igor
>>P.S. Why would anyone want "hypothreading"? :-D
> 
> 
>   Well, you can never have too much threading, or too many hippos!
> 
>     cheers,
>       DaveK

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 08:26:25AM +0200, Danilo Turina wrote:
>Too many hippos!!!!!!!!
>
>Now I want to stop reading e-mails and I want to listen to some music...

Yeah, maybe we otter refrain from talking about hippos so much.

cgf

>...hip(po) hop(po) for example!

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Williams, Gerald S (Jerry)]

Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> And how many of those are words you'd use in a normal conversation?
> I meant "hippoglycemic", "hippotenuse", and "hippie".  Everything
> 	else seems contrived. Igor

So I guess I shouldn't suggest that Cyghip may have a new
hippocorism now?

:-P

gsw

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Igor Pechtchanski
>Sent: 21 April 2005 17:53

> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 09:40:17AM +0800, Carlo Florendo wrote:
>>> Faith, simply means, the accession to something because of the authority
>>> of the one saying so. When cgf releases a new cygwin, you believe that
>>> it is indeed newer *because of the authority of cgf*.
>> 
>> As well you should.
>> Fear me.
>> cgf
> 
> Yeah.  <http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-03/msg00273.html>, IIRC...
> 	Igor


  Wow, someone paid cgf a compliment!  And only two years ago!  


  Let's hope all this flattery doesn't go to his head.........


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 09:40:17AM +0800, Carlo Florendo wrote:
> >Faith, simply means, the accession to something because of the authority
> >of the one saying so. When cgf releases a new cygwin, you believe that
> >it is indeed newer *because of the authority of cgf*.
>
> As well you should.
> Fear me.
> cgf

Yeah.  <http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-03/msg00273.html>, IIRC...
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Robb, Sam
>Sent: 20 April 2005 20:33

>> Well, procreation is hardly anti-evolution. :-)
> 
> This is probably the most sensible thing I've ever heard
> anyone say on the whole subject :-)
> 
> This and the whole hippo conversation... you're in rare
> form today, Mr. Faylor.  Thanks to you & Dave K., I now
> find myself in the mood to watch "A Night at the Opera"
> again...
> 
> -Samrobb


  Go!  And never darken my towels again!



    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 09:40:17AM +0800, Carlo Florendo wrote:
>Faith, simply means, the accession to something because of the authority 
>of the one saying so. When cgf releases a new cygwin, you believe that 
>it is indeed newer *because of the authority of cgf*.

As well you should.

Fear me.

cgf

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Carlo Florendo]

Christopher Faylor wrote:

>On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:30:03PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>  
>
>>----Original Message----
>>    
>>
>>>From: Christopher Faylor
>>>Sent: 20 April 2005 15:19
>>>      
>>>
>>>On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>"Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
>>>>>whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
>>>>species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
>>>>back a bit.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.  Do you REALLY
>>>think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as to not
>>>understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on something
>>>this basic?
>>>      
>>>
>>Well, I kinda hate to point this out, but given the state of education
>>in the southern states these days, there are probably a few
>>creationists on the list who really are that ill-informed, do not
>>understand how evolution works, and are in *desperate* need of an
>>education....
>>    
>>
>
>So, I sent something out about a "common ancestor" and royally confused
>all of the Southern Baptists reading the list.  I think it is extremely
>unlikely.  I'm not aware of any school system which has completely
>thrown out evolutionary text books.
>
>I think your premise is flawed anyway.  I think most creationists
>understand at least the "common ancestor" part of evolutionary theory.
>They may get it wrong and think that this means that man was descended
>from apes but they do at least have a glimmering of understanding of
>the concept.
>
>cgf
>
>  
>

I don't know anyone here has read "Why Colleges Breed Communits" by 
A.N.  Field, 1941.  (The new title o the book is Evolution Hoax 
Exposed).    What it says is ineresting, pointing out absurdities in the 
concept of  evolution.   A strong point that A.N. Field maintains is the 
absurdity of the jump from one species to another.   Evolution theorists 
and evolutionistsargue that it is possible for a jump in species.  They 
have pointed  out numerous cockroaches that have changed characteristics 
for the past 20 million years.  Sure, the cockroach then is not what we 
have now.  It evolved, yes, but it is still a cockroach.  A cockroach 
will never be a dog no matter how hard you try.


That the world was created in 7 days is a way of saying that there was 
succession in the creation of beings as we see them now.   Thus, when 
the author of Genesis says that the world was created in 7 days, he 
doesn't commit  any mistake since he does not speak literally.  The 
creation of the universein 7 days, though,  is not an impossibility 
since God is omnipotent.

Thanks!

Best Regards,

Carlo

-- 
Carlo Florendo
Astra Philippines Inc.
www.astra.ph

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Carlo Florendo]

Dave Korn wrote:

>----Original Message----
>  
>
>  In science, we have this wonderful concept, called "evidence".
>Observation generates evidence; faith does not.  In fact, faith is an
>invitation to self-delusion, since it consists mainly in the false inference
>that the apparent strength and clarity of a perception or belief is an
>indication of the accuracy of its relation to reality, which is a total
>non-sequitur.
>
>    cheers,
>      DaveK
>  
>
Science is so limited.   It can not go beyond material evidence.  It 
cannot go beyond the sub-atomic elements.  That is because science's 
realm is that of matter.   Beyond matter, it does not have the tools nor 
the methods to arrive at conclusions which touch on the most fundamental 
question:  the question of being and that of the transcendental realities.

Can science prove beauty, for instance?

To say that faith is an invitation to delusion is absurd.  I will bet 
that 99% of what you believe is from faith.   Do you have evidence that 
you are the son of your mother?   Did you see yourself being born from 
your mother?
You believed you indeed are your mother's son because of the credibility 
of those around you.   They treated you as family.  Thus you believed.   
You did not need proof and evidence.   That accession to reality is 
called faith. 


What about this mailing list?  The fact that you have posted here means 
that you acceded to faith in believing that this mailing list is really 
from cygwin.   What if I just made all this up and that the entire 
cygwin is a hoax?

Faith, simply means, the accession to something because of the authority 
of the one saying so. When cgf releases a new cygwin, you believe that 
it is indeed newer *because of the authority of cgf*.    Thus, I have 
faith in cgf when he says that he released a new cygwin.  I do not need 
evidence. Do you?  He may commit a mistake in forgetting to upload the 
new cygwin but that's beside the point.  I believe first, then I go to 
the site and download the new cygwin.  Not the other way around.


Best Regards,

Carlo

-- 
Carlo Florendo
Astra Philippines Inc.
www.astra.ph

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[One Angry User]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:32:48PM -0400, Robb, Sam wrote:
> >>Well, procreation is hardly anti-evolution.  :-)
> >
> >This is probably the most sensible thing I've ever heard anyone say on
> >the whole subject :-)
> >
> >This and the whole hippo conversation...  you're in rare form today,
> >Mr.  Faylor.  Thanks to you & Dave K., I now find myself in the mood to
> >watch "A Night at the Opera" again...
>
> I just want to go on record that I think that evolution is more than
> just a hippothesus.
>
> .
> .
> .
>
> Ok.  I will stop now.

This thread would seem even funnier with a few beers in me...

OAU

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:32:48PM -0400, Robb, Sam wrote:
>>Well, procreation is hardly anti-evolution.  :-)
>
>This is probably the most sensible thing I've ever heard anyone say on
>the whole subject :-)
>
>This and the whole hippo conversation...  you're in rare form today,
>Mr.  Faylor.  Thanks to you & Dave K., I now find myself in the mood to
>watch "A Night at the Opera" again...

I just want to go on record that I think that evolution is more than
just a hippothesus.

.
.
.

Ok.  I will stop now.

cgf

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Robb, Sam]

> Well, procreation is hardly anti-evolution. :-)

This is probably the most sensible thing I've ever heard
anyone say on the whole subject :-)

This and the whole hippo conversation... you're in rare
form today, Mr. Faylor.  Thanks to you & Dave K., I now
find myself in the mood to watch "A Night at the Opera"
again...

-Samrobb

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Robb, Sam wrote:

> >   In science, we have this wonderful concept, called "evidence".
> > Observation generates evidence; faith does not.
>
> Nonsense.  Faith is based on evidence.  Tell me - do you think that
> the sun will come up tomorrow?  Yes?  That's faith.  You have your
> observations, some evidence, and you extrapolate from that to reach
> a conclusion about something you have yet to observe or experience.

Sam, with all due respect, I believe you're addressing the later point by
this rejoinder, rather than the lines you quoted.  You can hardly argue
with the fact that observation does indeed generate evidence (in fact,
"evidence" is just "observation" translated), and that faith is generally
associated with lack of evidence (because otherwise it would be called a
"scientific conclusion").

Now, being an agnostic, I'm not taking sides here.  In fact, I would
classify faith into two categories: "honest faith", which is really a
deeply believed theory that's doesn't contradict what little evidence
there is, and "blind faith", which is belief in something contrary to
unambiguously interpretable exising evidence[*].

One could argue that the scientific method of adhering to a theory until
it's contradicted by facts is just "honest faith" in the above definition.
There are also well-known stories of scientists hanging on to their
theories far beyond that point (in which case this becomes "blind faith").

FWIW, I (and most people) see nothing wrong with "honest faith".  It's
"blind faith" that's mostly argued about.

> > In fact, faith is an invitation to self-delusion, since it consists
> > mainly in the false inference that the apparent strength and clarity
> > of a perception or belief is an indication of the accuracy of its
> > relation to reality, which is a total non-sequitur.
>
> Oh, come one.  The basis of the scientific method is *precisely*
> the idea that the "strength and clarity of a perception... is an
> indication of the accuracy of its relation to reality".  Science
> is based on our perceptions of reality; increasingly detailed
> observations lead to an incresingly accurate model of reality.
>
> If I follow your logic, then I must conclude that both science and
> faith - indeed, anything based on my perceptions - are nothing but
> self-delusion.  Intellectually cute, perhaps, but hardly satisfying.

Now we're getting "Matrix"y...
	Igor
[*] Given the fact that the definition of "unambiguously interpretable" is
subject to some heated arguments, everyone has a different idea of what
constitutes "blind faith".
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[One Angry User]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Robb, Sam wrote:

> I *think* that I understand the general arguments from both
> sides (pro-evolution/anti-creation, anti-evolution/pro-creation,
> and the various mixes).

Well, procreation is hardly anti-evolution. :-)

OAU

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Robb, Sam]

>   In science, we have this wonderful concept, called "evidence".
> Observation generates evidence; faith does not.

Nonsense.  Faith is based on evidence.  Tell me - do you think that
the sun will come up tomorrow?  Yes?  That's faith.  You have your
observations, some evidence, and you extrapolate from that to reach
a conclusion about something you have yet to observe or experience.

> In fact, faith is an
> invitation to self-delusion, since it consists mainly in the 
> false inference
> that the apparent strength and clarity of a perception or belief is an
> indication of the accuracy of its relation to reality, which 
> is a total
> non-sequitur.

Oh, come one.  The basis of the scientific method is *precisely*
the idea that the "strength and clarity of a perception... is an
indication of the accuracy of its relation to reality".  Science
is based on our perceptions of reality; increasingly detailed
observations lead to an incresingly accurate model of reality.

If I follow your logic, then I must conclude that both science and
faith - indeed, anything based on my perceptions - are nothing but
self-delusion.  Intellectually cute, perhaps, but hardly satisfying.

-Samrobb

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 07:24:48PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>----Original Message----
>>From: Lionel B
>>Sent: 20 April 2005 10:56
>
>> "Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:59:56AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>>> ----Original Message----
>>>>> From: Christopher Faylor
>>>>> Sent: 19 April 2005 02:28
>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 03:49:40AM +0530, NNK_ml wrote:
>>>>>> Am doing a little looking-into in to the purpose of the special
>>>>>> folders in Linux though...
>>>>> 
>>>>> Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I know! I thought they were related to whales! I think science is fun!
>>>> 
>>>> Whales are just overgrown hippopotamuses.  Um.  Hippopotami.  Hippos,
>>>> goddamit.  Anyway they're just big ones.
>>> 
>>> Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
>>> whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
>> 
>> Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
>> species... ok, for a T. Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
>> back a bit. 
>> 
>>> Also, apparently "death by hippo" is fairly common.  They are aggressive
>>> beasts.
>> 
>> Also short-tempered and short-sighted. 
>
>You're not kidding! I used to be an opthalmologist.  We had a hippo
>come in for a vision test one afternoon.  When I asked him to try and
>read the smallest line on the reading chart, he was *livid*!
>
>Honestly, talk about awkward customers.  We put up a sign saying 'No
>hippos' after that.  Then someone pointed out that we might be in
>breach of disability discrimination legislation, so we put up another
>sign saying "Except guide hippos for the blind".  It was just typical
>we'd get a deaf customer in that afternoon with her hearing-ear hippo.
>
>After all that, I got out of the opthalmology business.

I'm not surprised.  You obviously never really subscribed to the
hippocratic oath.

cgf

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Lionel B
>Sent: 20 April 2005 10:56

> "Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:59:56AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>> ----Original Message----
>>>> From: Christopher Faylor
>>>> Sent: 19 April 2005 02:28
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 03:49:40AM +0530, NNK_ml wrote:
>>>>> Am doing a little looking-into in to the purpose of the special
>>>>> folders in Linux though...
>>>> 
>>>> Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?
>>>> 
>>>> I know! I thought they were related to whales! I think science is fun!
>>> 
>>> Whales are just overgrown hippopotamuses.  Um.  Hippopotami.  Hippos,
>>> goddamit.  Anyway they're just big ones.
>> 
>> Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
>> whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
> 
> Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
> species... ok, for a T. Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
> back a bit. 
> 
>> Also, apparently "death by hippo" is fairly common.  They are aggressive
>> beasts.
> 
> Also short-tempered and short-sighted. 

  You're not kidding!  I used to be an opthalmologist.  We had a hippo come
in for a vision test one afternoon.  When I asked him to try and read the
smallest line on the reading chart, he was *livid*!  

  Honestly, talk about awkward customers.  We put up a sign saying 'No
hippos' after that.  Then someone pointed out that we might be in breach of
disability discrimination legislation, so we put up another sign saying
"Except guide hippos for the blind".  It was just typical we'd get a deaf
customer in that afternoon with her hearing-ear hippo. 

  After all that, I got out of the opthalmology business.

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Robb, Sam
>Sent: 20 April 2005 18:55


> At this point, I'm not sure how to resolve the apparent contradiction
> between human observation and faith.  


  In science, we have this wonderful concept, called "evidence".
Observation generates evidence; faith does not.  In fact, faith is an
invitation to self-delusion, since it consists mainly in the false inference
that the apparent strength and clarity of a perception or belief is an
indication of the accuracy of its relation to reality, which is a total
non-sequitur.

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Robb, Sam]

> I think your premise is flawed anyway.  I think most creationists
> understand at least the "common ancestor" part of evolutionary theory.
> They may get it wrong and think that this means that man was descended
> from apes but they do at least have a glimmering of understanding of
> the concept.

Guess I get to be the token creationist on the list.

Regardless of some may think, my belief in a literal creation and
faith in God does *not* make me a simpleton or an idiot, thank you.
I'm of above-average intelligence, enjoy intellectual pursuits,
and until I reached the age of 30, I had no real interest in God -
so I've hardly been "brainwashed from my youth".

Yes, I believe in the literal creation.

Yes, I understand evolution (at least as well as your average,
semi-interested layman).

I *think* that I understand the general arguments from both
sides (pro-evolution/anti-creation, anti-evolution/pro-creation,
and the various mixes).

I've heard creationists who lack a basic education in the physical
sciences makes some absurd claims about biology, chemistry, etc.

I've also heard evolutionists who lack a basic education in theology
make absurd claims about the Bible and its contents as well.

At this point, I'm not sure how to resolve the apparent contradiction
between human observation and faith.  I am confident that such a
resolution *does* exist, though, even though I may never see or
understand that explanation in this life.

I am also confident that debating evolution vs. creationism is largely
useless, as the debate about how the universe came to be in its current
state is only the symptom of a deeper debate:  whether or not you believe
what the Bible says about Jesus Christ.  It's all too often just a way
of dancing around this central issue and an opportunity to make yourself
look or feel smarter than the other guy.

-Samrobb

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 04:42:19PM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
>"Christopher Faylor" wrote...
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:42:47PM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
>> >"Christopher Faylor" wrote...
>> >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
>> >> >"Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
>> >> >>Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
>> >> >>whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
>> >> >
>> >> >Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
>> >> >species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
>> >> >back a bit.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.
>> >
>> >Pleased to hear they are still teaching evolution in your country.
>>
>> So when I mentioned "common ancestor" you thought I was speaking of
>> creationism?
>
>No.  I was attempting a "humourous" rejoinder
>(http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=funny); i.e.  I was making a
>rather lame attempt at a "joke"
>(http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=joke).

Yeah, implying that "America is full of backward hicks" schtick is so
refreshing and original.

>NB: there's a big fat line between "endearingly grumpy"
>(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Meldrew) and "depressingly
>humourless".

Just like the line between "moderately clueful" and "annoyingly
clueless", I suppose.

cgf

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Lionel B]

"Christopher Faylor" wrote...
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:42:47PM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
> >"Christopher Faylor" wrote...
> >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
> >> >"Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
> >> >>Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
> >> >>whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
> >> >
> >> >Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
> >> >species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
> >> >back a bit.
> >>
> >> Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.
> >
> >Pleased to hear they are still teaching evolution in your country.
>
> So when I mentioned "common ancestor" you thought I was speaking of
> creationism?

No. I was attempting a "humourous" rejoinder (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=funny); i.e. I was making a
rather lame attempt at a "joke" (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=joke).

NB: there's a big fat line between "endearingly grumpy" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Meldrew) and  "depressingly
humourless".

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 11:08:45AM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>Don't be so sure.  Google for "turtle mammal" and see the "Stone Age
>Mutant Mammal Turtles" link (third match that comes up)...  Ouch.

I really liked the "udderly ridiculous" statement in that page.  I hope
it was intentional.

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Apr 20 15:54, Dave Korn wrote:
> > ----Original Message----
> > >From: Brian Dessent
> > >Sent: 20 April 2005 15:31
> >
> > > Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > >
> > >>> Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
> > >>> species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
> > >>> back a bit.
> > >>
> > >> Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.  Do you REALLY
> > >> think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as to not
> > >> understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on something
> > >> this basic?
> > >>
> > >> I suppose if I'd said "recent common ancestor" someone would have said
> > >> "It's not so RECENT.  It was 2.5 million YEARS ago."
> > >
> > > Note: This thread contains material on evolution.  Evolution is a
> > > theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things.  This
> > > material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and
> > > critically considered.
> >
> >   Note:  This thread contains material on creationism.  Creationism is a
> > fantasy, not a theory, nor a fact, entirely uncontaminated by such base
> > material considerations as 'evidence' or 'proof', and as such should be
> > treated with *extreme* caution, as the tendency of the human mind to engage
> > in wish-fulfillment by means of self-delusion is well documented.
>
> So we haven't been created by aliens from outer space 20000 years ago?
>
> *Now* I'm worried...

If we were, they must've had a really *NASTY* sense of humor...
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:42:47PM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
>"Christopher Faylor" wrote...
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
>> >"Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
>> >>Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
>> >>whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
>> >
>> >Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
>> >species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
>> >back a bit.
>> 
>> Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.
>
>Pleased to hear they are still teaching evolution in your country.

So when I mentioned "common ancestor" you thought I was speaking of
creationism?  That's very odd.

But, please, go ahead and show some of that refreshing knee-jerk
anti-American preconceptions.  This truly demonstrates the spirit of
open-minded scientific inquiry that so typifies evolutionary theory.

>>Do you REALLY think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as
>>to not understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on
>>something this basic?
>
>I'll refrain from answering that...

Why?  Do you actually have an informed opinion on the subject?  Somehow
I doubt it.

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:30:03PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> >----Original Message----
> >>From: Christopher Faylor
> >>Sent: 20 April 2005 15:19
> >
> >>On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
> >>>"Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
> >>>>Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
> >>>>whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
> >>>
> >>>Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
> >>>species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
> >>>back a bit.
> >>
> >>Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.  Do you REALLY
> >>think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as to not
> >>understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on something
> >>this basic?
> >
> >Well, I kinda hate to point this out, but given the state of education
> >in the southern states these days, there are probably a few
> >creationists on the list who really are that ill-informed, do not
> >understand how evolution works, and are in *desperate* need of an
> >education....
>
> So, I sent something out about a "common ancestor" and royally confused
> all of the Southern Baptists reading the list.  I think it is extremely
> unlikely.  I'm not aware of any school system which has completely
> thrown out evolutionary text books.
>
> I think your premise is flawed anyway.  I think most creationists
> understand at least the "common ancestor" part of evolutionary theory.
> They may get it wrong and think that this means that man was descended
> from apes but they do at least have a glimmering of understanding of
> the concept.

Don't be so sure.  Google for "turtle mammal" and see the "Stone Age
Mutant Mammal Turtles" link (third match that comes up)...  Ouch.
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Apr 20 15:54, Dave Korn wrote:
> ----Original Message----
> >From: Brian Dessent
> >Sent: 20 April 2005 15:31
> 
> > Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > 
> >>> Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
> >>> species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
> >>> back a bit.
> >> 
> >> Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.  Do you REALLY
> >> think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as to not
> >> understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on something
> >> this basic? 
> >> 
> >> I suppose if I'd said "recent common ancestor" someone would have said
> >> "It's not so RECENT.  It was 2.5 million YEARS ago."
> > 
> > Note: This thread contains material on evolution.  Evolution is a
> > theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things.  This
> > material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and
> > critically considered.
> 
> 
>   Note:  This thread contains material on creationism.  Creationism is a
> fantasy, not a theory, nor a fact, entirely uncontaminated by such base
> material considerations as 'evidence' or 'proof', and as such should be
> treated with *extreme* caution, as the tendency of the human mind to engage
> in wish-fulfillment by means of self-delusion is well documented.

So we haven't been created by aliens from outer space 20000 years ago?

*Now* I'm worried...


Corinna

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:30:03PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>----Original Message----
>>From: Christopher Faylor
>>Sent: 20 April 2005 15:19
>
>>On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
>>>"Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
>>>>Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
>>>>whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
>>>
>>>Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
>>>species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
>>>back a bit.
>>
>>Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.  Do you REALLY
>>think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as to not
>>understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on something
>>this basic?
>
>Well, I kinda hate to point this out, but given the state of education
>in the southern states these days, there are probably a few
>creationists on the list who really are that ill-informed, do not
>understand how evolution works, and are in *desperate* need of an
>education....

So, I sent something out about a "common ancestor" and royally confused
all of the Southern Baptists reading the list.  I think it is extremely
unlikely.  I'm not aware of any school system which has completely
thrown out evolutionary text books.

I think your premise is flawed anyway.  I think most creationists
understand at least the "common ancestor" part of evolutionary theory.
They may get it wrong and think that this means that man was descended
from apes but they do at least have a glimmering of understanding of
the concept.

cgf

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Brian Dessent
>Sent: 20 April 2005 15:31

> Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
>>> Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
>>> species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
>>> back a bit.
>> 
>> Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.  Do you REALLY
>> think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as to not
>> understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on something
>> this basic? 
>> 
>> I suppose if I'd said "recent common ancestor" someone would have said
>> "It's not so RECENT.  It was 2.5 million YEARS ago."
> 
> Note: This thread contains material on evolution.  Evolution is a
> theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things.  This
> material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and
> critically considered.


  Note:  This thread contains material on creationism.  Creationism is a
fantasy, not a theory, nor a fact, entirely uncontaminated by such base
material considerations as 'evidence' or 'proof', and as such should be
treated with *extreme* caution, as the tendency of the human mind to engage
in wish-fulfillment by means of self-delusion is well documented.


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Lionel B]

"Christopher Faylor" wrote...
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
> >"Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
> >>Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
> >>whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
> >
> >Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
> >species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
> >back a bit.
> 
> Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.

Pleased to hear they are still teaching evolution in your country.

> Do you REALLY
> think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as to not
> understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on something
> this basic?

I'll refrain from answering that...

> I suppose if I'd said "recent common ancestor" someone would have said
> "It's not so RECENT.  It was 2.5 million YEARS ago."

Some awful pedant, no doubt. Then you'd be have to hit them with the T. Rex/plums.

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Christopher Faylor
>Sent: 20 April 2005 15:19

> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
>> "Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
>>> Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
>>> whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
>> 
>> Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
>> species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
>> back a bit.
> 
> Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.  Do you REALLY
> think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as to not
> understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on something
> this basic?


  Well, I kinda hate to point this out, but given the state of education in
the southern states these days, there are probably a few creationists on the
list who really are that ill-informed, do not understand how evolution
works, and are in *desperate* need of an education....


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Brian Dessent]

Christopher Faylor wrote:

> >Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
> >species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
> >back a bit.
> 
> Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.  Do you REALLY
> think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as to not
> understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on something
> this basic?
> 
> I suppose if I'd said "recent common ancestor" someone would have said
> "It's not so RECENT.  It was 2.5 million YEARS ago."

Note: This thread contains material on evolution.  Evolution is a
theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things.  This
material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and
critically considered.

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Lionel B wrote:
>"Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
>>Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
>>whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?
>
>Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral
>species...  ok, for a T.  Rex and a greengage plum you might have to go
>back a bit.

Yes, my education did progress beyond the second grade.  Do you REALLY
think that anyone reading this list is so ill-informed as to not
understand how evolution works and needs to be educated on something
this basic?

I suppose if I'd said "recent common ancestor" someone would have said
"It's not so RECENT.  It was 2.5 million YEARS ago."

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Lionel B]

"Christopher Faylor" wrote ...
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:59:56AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> >----Original Message----
> >>From: Christopher Faylor
> >>Sent: 19 April 2005 02:28
> >
> >>On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 03:49:40AM +0530, NNK_ml wrote:
> >>>Am doing a little looking-into in to the purpose of the special folders
> >>>in Linux though...
> >>
> >>Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?
> >>
> >>I know! I thought they were related to whales! I think science is fun!
> >
> >Whales are just overgrown hippopotamuses.  Um.  Hippopotami.  Hippos,
> >goddamit.  Anyway they're just big ones.
>
> Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that whales
> and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?

Any two species that ever existed on the planet have a common ancestral species... ok, for a T. Rex and a greengage plum
you might have to go back a bit.

> Also, apparently "death by hippo" is fairly common.  They are aggressive
> beasts.

Also short-tempered and short-sighted. I spent some time in Swaziland some years ago. The rivers there abound with
hippos and crocs. The (human) body count inflicted by the former is indeed much higher.

Lionel

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Christopher Faylor
>Sent: 19 April 2005 14:56

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:59:56AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>> ----Original Message----
>>> From: Christopher Faylor
>>> Sent: 19 April 2005 02:28
>> 
>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 03:49:40AM +0530, NNK_ml wrote:
>>>> Am doing a little looking-into in to the purpose of the special folders
>>>> in Linux though...
>>> 
>>> Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?
>>> 
>>> I know! I thought they were related to whales! I think science is fun!
>> 
>> Whales are just overgrown hippopotamuses.  Um.  Hippopotami.  Hippos,
>> goddamit.  Anyway they're just big ones.
> 
> Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that
> whales and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?

  Damn, caught out with a valid post!  Yeh, it may or may not be proven in
the end, but it's a very real hypothesis, and part of the overall "aquatic
ape" theory of evolution that suggests various species have, from time to
time, for reasons of environmental selective pressure in their usual
ecological niche, returned to an amphibious lifestyle, and that in some
cases the species have diverged when the selective pressure releases, with
some part of the species returning to the original land-dwelling
environment, and some becoming further and further adapted to aquatic
lifestyles until they end up becoming fully water-dwelling.
 
> Also, apparently "death by hippo" is fairly common.  They are aggressive
> beasts.


  Death by *falling* hippo is also quite common.  They apparently like to
practice freefall skydiving.


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:59:56AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>----Original Message----
>>From: Christopher Faylor
>>Sent: 19 April 2005 02:28
>
>>On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 03:49:40AM +0530, NNK_ml wrote:
>>>Am doing a little looking-into in to the purpose of the special folders
>>>in Linux though...
>>
>>Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?
>>
>>I know! I thought they were related to whales! I think science is fun!
>
>Whales are just overgrown hippopotamuses.  Um.  Hippopotami.  Hippos,
>goddamit.  Anyway they're just big ones.

Actually, all kidding aside, this is correct, right?  They think that whales
and hippos came from a common ancestor, don't they?

Also, apparently "death by hippo" is fairly common.  They are aggressive
beasts.

cgf

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[One Angry User]

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 09:54:51PM -0400, One Angry User wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >
> > > Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?
> >
> > Which porpoise?  A living porpoise *is* a mammal.  Or are you talking
> > about a dead porpoise?
> >
> > > I know!  I thought they were related to whales!  I think science is fun!
> >
> > Interestingly enough (another bit of trivia), a tortoise isn't a mammal...
> > Now, what makes the letter 'p' so special, that changing a 't' to it makes
> > a mammal?
>
> Can't you just look at it: p and see the "mammalian protuberance"?

As a matter of fact, I can.  And a D is bigger...

...

Oh, so that's why they call 'em DD in the US...

OAU

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 09:54:51PM -0400, One Angry User wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
> > Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?
> 
> Which porpoise?  A living porpoise *is* a mammal.  Or are you talking
> about a dead porpoise?
> 
> > I know!  I thought they were related to whales!  I think science is fun!
> 
> Interestingly enough (another bit of trivia), a tortoise isn't a mammal...
> Now, what makes the letter 'p' so special, that changing a 't' to it makes
> a mammal?

Can't you just look at it: p and see the "mammalian protuberance"?

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: One Angry User
>Sent: 19 April 2005 02:55

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
>> Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?
> 
> Which porpoise?  A living porpoise *is* a mammal.  Or are you talking
> about a dead porpoise?
> 
>> I know!  I thought they were related to whales!  I think science is fun!
> 
> Interestingly enough (another bit of trivia), a tortoise isn't a mammal...
> Now, what makes the letter 'p' so special, that changing a 't' to it makes
> a mammal?
> 
> OAU


  Stella Tortois is my favourite lager!


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Christopher Faylor
>Sent: 19 April 2005 02:28

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 03:49:40AM +0530, NNK_ml wrote:
>> Am doing a little looking-into in to the purpose of the special folders
>> in Linux though...
> 
> Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?
> 
> I know!  I thought they were related to whales!  I think science is fun!
> 
> cgf


  Whales are just overgrown hippopotamuses.  Um.  Hippopotami.  Hippos,
goddamit.  Anyway they're just big ones.


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[One Angry User]

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?

Which porpoise?  A living porpoise *is* a mammal.  Or are you talking
about a dead porpoise?

> I know!  I thought they were related to whales!  I think science is fun!

Interestingly enough (another bit of trivia), a tortoise isn't a mammal...
Now, what makes the letter 'p' so special, that changing a 't' to it makes
a mammal?

OAU

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 03:49:40AM +0530, NNK_ml wrote:
>Am doing a little looking-into in to the purpose of the special folders
>in Linux though...

Just a bit of trivia: did you know that a porpoise was a mammal?

I know!  I thought they were related to whales!  I think science is fun!

cgf

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[NNK_ml]

Dave Korn wrote:
> ----Original Message----
> 
>>From: Christopher Faylor
>>Sent: 18 April 2005 18:44
> 
> 
>>On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 07:40:39PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>
>>>On Apr 18 18:27, Dave Korn wrote:
>>>
>>>>----Original Message----
>>>>
>>>>>From: NNK_ml
>>>>>Sent: 18 April 2005 18:18
>>>>
>>>>>>>Well, /bin is the bin, that's a bit like /dev/null, but /usr/bin is
>>>>>>>the user bin, that's where we throw all the user's files away when
>>>>>>>we want to delete them.  Then there's the user's local bin, which is
>>>>>>>a bit like the recycle bin in windows.
>>>>>
>>>>>So /usr/bin is where you dump entire user directories, but their local
>>>>>bin is where files go when the user deletes their own stuff?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I refer you to the last sentence of my earlier post!
>>>
>>>Since you were all making it up anyway, let's get serious (OT alarm!):
>>>
>>>Wouldn't it be much better(*) and cleaner(*) if every single Cygwin
>>>package would use its own subdirectory under C:\Program Files ?
>>
>>Isn't this exactly what Dave was saying?
>>
>>Again, I didn't really read the above but that is my interpretation of
>>what you've both written since I don't have time to do anything other
>>than respond. 
>>
>>cgf
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   Excellent work, young grasshopper.  Simply empty your mind of all
> confusion and thought before posting; soon you too will have achieved the
> satori of getting a 'first post' on /.
> 
> 
>     cheers,
>       DaveK

Not aiming that high yet by any means.  :P

Am doing a little looking-into in to the purpose of the special folders
in Linux though...

Thanks to one and all for their help/advice/patience/disparaging-remarks.

-Neil, stands corrected

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Christopher Faylor
>Sent: 18 April 2005 18:44

> On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 07:40:39PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Apr 18 18:27, Dave Korn wrote:
>>> ----Original Message----
>>>> From: NNK_ml
>>>> Sent: 18 April 2005 18:18
>>> 
>>>>>> Well, /bin is the bin, that's a bit like /dev/null, but /usr/bin is
>>>>>> the user bin, that's where we throw all the user's files away when
>>>>>> we want to delete them.  Then there's the user's local bin, which is
>>>>>> a bit like the recycle bin in windows.
>>>> 
>>>> So /usr/bin is where you dump entire user directories, but their local
>>>> bin is where files go when the user deletes their own stuff?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I refer you to the last sentence of my earlier post!
>> 
>> Since you were all making it up anyway, let's get serious (OT alarm!):
>> 
>> Wouldn't it be much better(*) and cleaner(*) if every single Cygwin
>> package would use its own subdirectory under C:\Program Files ?
> 
> Isn't this exactly what Dave was saying?
> 
> Again, I didn't really read the above but that is my interpretation of
> what you've both written since I don't have time to do anything other
> than respond. 
> 
> cgf



  Excellent work, young grasshopper.  Simply empty your mind of all
confusion and thought before posting; soon you too will have achieved the
satori of getting a 'first post' on /.


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 07:40:39PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Apr 18 18:27, Dave Korn wrote:
>>----Original Message----
>>>From: NNK_ml
>>>Sent: 18 April 2005 18:18
>> 
>>>>>Well, /bin is the bin, that's a bit like /dev/null, but /usr/bin is the
>>>>>user bin, that's where we throw all the user's files away when we want
>>>>>to delete them.  Then there's the user's local bin, which is a bit like
>>>>>the recycle bin in windows.
>>>
>>>So /usr/bin is where you dump entire user directories, but their local
>>>bin is where files go when the user deletes their own stuff?
>>
>>
>>I refer you to the last sentence of my earlier post!
>
>Since you were all making it up anyway, let's get serious (OT alarm!):
>
>Wouldn't it be much better(*) and cleaner(*) if every single Cygwin
>package would use its own subdirectory under C:\Program Files ?

Isn't this exactly what Dave was saying?

Again, I didn't really read the above but that is my interpretation of what
you've both written since I don't have time to do anything other than respond.

cgf

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Apr 18 18:27, Dave Korn wrote:
> ----Original Message----
> >From: NNK_ml
> >Sent: 18 April 2005 18:18
> 
> >>> Well, /bin is the bin, that's a bit like /dev/null, but /usr/bin is the
> >>> user bin, that's where we throw all the user's files away when we want
> >>> to delete them.  Then there's the user's local bin, which is a bit like
> >>> the recycle bin in windows.
> > 
> > So /usr/bin is where you dump entire user directories, but their local
> > bin is where files go when the user deletes their own stuff?
> 
> 
>   I refer you to the last sentence of my earlier post!

Since you were all making it up anyway, let's get serious (OT alarm!):

Wouldn't it be much better(*) and cleaner(*) if every single Cygwin package
would use its own subdirectory under C:\Program Files ?


Corinna

(*) in a more Windowish sense.

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: NNK_ml
>Sent: 18 April 2005 18:18

>>> Well, /bin is the bin, that's a bit like /dev/null, but /usr/bin is the
>>> user bin, that's where we throw all the user's files away when we want
>>> to delete them.  Then there's the user's local bin, which is a bit like
>>> the recycle bin in windows.
> 
> So /usr/bin is where you dump entire user directories, but their local
> bin is where files go when the user deletes their own stuff?


  I refer you to the last sentence of my earlier post!


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[NNK_ml]

>>Well, /bin is the bin, that's a bit like /dev/null, but /usr/bin is the
>>user bin, that's where we throw all the user's files away when we want
>>to delete them.  Then there's the user's local bin, which is a bit like
>>the recycle bin in windows. 

So /usr/bin is where you dump entire user directories, but their local
bin is where files go when the user deletes their own stuff?

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 05:53:13PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>From: NNK_ml
>>Sent: 18 April 2005 14:31
>
>>Since we're on the subject...why is there a /bin and a /usr/bin?  Can't
>>we just dump all the program files in one place?  And I was looking at
>>SUSE Linux, and it had even more */bins.../bin, /usr/bin, /sbin, etc...
>>
>>Why...?
>>
>>-Neil, aka Newbness Incarnate
>
>Well, /bin is the bin, that's a bit like /dev/null, but /usr/bin is the
>user bin, that's where we throw all the user's files away when we want
>to delete them.  Then there's the user's local bin, which is a bit like
>the recycle bin in windows.  But not to be confused with the S-bin,
>which is short for the system bin, that's where the system throws stuff
>away.  Having all these bins is great, because it means that if the
>system bin fills up, users can still delete their files, and even if
>the user bin is full up, each user can still use their local bin.  So
>basically it's a high-availability multiply-redundant fail-safe way of
>deleting files.
>
>
>OTOH I could have been making it all up.

I think this sums things up pretty nicely.

OTOH, I may not actually have read it all that closely.

cgf

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: NNK_ml
>Sent: 18 April 2005 14:31

> 
> Since we're on the subject...why is there a /bin and a /usr/bin?  Can't
> we just dump all the program files in one place?  And I was looking at
> SUSE Linux, and it had even more */bins.../bin, /usr/bin, /sbin, etc...
> 
> Why...?
> 
> -Neil, aka Newbness Incarnate


  Well, /bin is the bin, that's a bit like /dev/null, but /usr/bin is the
user bin, that's where we throw all the user's files away when we want to
delete them.  Then there's the user's local bin, which is a bit like the
recycle bin in windows.  But not to be confused with the S-bin, which is
short for the system bin, that's where the system throws stuff away.  Having
all these bins is great, because it means that if the system bin fills up,
users can still delete their files, and even if the user bin is full up,
each user can still use their local bin.  So basically it's a
high-availability multiply-redundant fail-safe way of deleting files.


  OTOH I could have been making it all up.

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[NNK_ml]

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:48:40PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> 
>>On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:38:47PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>
>>>>Properly off-topic'ed.
>>>>
>>>>On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Dave Korn wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>From: beau
>>>>>>Sent: 13 April 2005 18:28
>>>>>
>>>>>>Without a doubt or a reservation, this cygwin list is the most
>>>>>>responsive, helpful resource I have ever had the pleasure to rely on.
>>>>>
>>>>>Wow! http://cygwin.com/acronyms#WJN !
>>>>
>>>>Gettin' chilly down there, eh?  ];->
>>>
>>>So, which is it?  responsive and helpful or the most mean-spirited
>>>mailing list since the dawn of Godwin?
>>
>>You're the RCM (1st meaning ;-) ) -- it's your call...  Unless you're
>>planning to put this to a vote?
> 
> 
> But, by the second meaning, whatever call I make would be flawed. :-)
> 
> I think it really is both.  If you are expecting a direct line to a
> developer who will decode your gdb backtraces for you, it could be a
> mean place.  If you are expecting someone to explain why there is a
> /usr/bin and a /bin, then it could be a helpful place.
> 
> cgf
> 

Since we're on the subject...why is there a /bin and a /usr/bin?  Can't
we just dump all the program files in one place?  And I was looking at
SUSE Linux, and it had even more */bins.../bin, /usr/bin, /sbin, etc...

Why...?

-Neil, aka Newbness Incarnate

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: beau
>Sent: 13 April 2005 20:43

> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=dave+korn+ksh&btnG=Google+Search
> 
> You can imagine my confusion after a quick look at this result.  I was
> beginning to feel guilty about switching to bash when I log onto
> freeshell.

  Imagine how disappointing ego-surfing was for me when I first got on the
internet back in '94 and found that this geezer had been leaving his grubby
little prints all over it for nearly thirty years before me!  Then imagine
my delight as I realised what a low profile this meant I could take on the
'net and slip under the radar.  GOK what happens these days when potential
employers try to google me......

ObCygwin:  Just to get this thread back on topic (cygwin, remember that?!
:), I think I should point out that this sort of off-topic chatter belongs
on the cygwin-talk mailing list, and when it goes on for too long on the
main list it's time to move the thread.

  To get there, you just tap your heels together three times and repeat
"There's no place like <bok-bok-bok-b'gawwwk!>" while running round the room
flapping your arms like a chicken and shouting "TITTTL! TITTTL!" .....

  .....When you fall over and hit your head, you'll wake up in
cygwin-talk......



    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Christopher Faylor
>Sent: 13 April 2005 20:18

> On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:48:40PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:38:47PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>> Properly off-topic'ed.
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Dave Korn wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>> From: beau
>>>>>> Sent: 13 April 2005 18:28
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Without a doubt or a reservation, this cygwin list is the most
>>>>>> responsive, helpful resource I have ever had the pleasure to rely on.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Wow! http://cygwin.com/acronyms#WJN !
>>>> 
>>>> Gettin' chilly down there, eh?  ];->
>>> 
>>> So, which is it?  responsive and helpful or the most mean-spirited
>>> mailing list since the dawn of Godwin?
>> 
>> You're the RCM (1st meaning ;-) ) -- it's your call...  Unless you're
>> planning to put this to a vote?
> 
> But, by the second meaning, whatever call I make would be flawed. :-)
> 
> I think it really is both.  If you are expecting a direct line to a
> developer who will decode your gdb backtraces for you, it could be a
> mean place.  If you are expecting someone to explain why there is a
> /usr/bin and a /bin, then it could be a helpful place.
> 
> cgf


  Then again, sometimes it's the other way round!


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:48:40PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:38:47PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>> >Properly off-topic'ed.
>> >
>> >On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Dave Korn wrote:
>> >
>> >>>From: beau
>> >>>Sent: 13 April 2005 18:28
>> >>
>> >>>Without a doubt or a reservation, this cygwin list is the most
>> >>>responsive, helpful resource I have ever had the pleasure to rely on.
>> >>
>> >>Wow! http://cygwin.com/acronyms#WJN !
>> >
>> >Gettin' chilly down there, eh?  ];->
>>
>> So, which is it?  responsive and helpful or the most mean-spirited
>> mailing list since the dawn of Godwin?
>
>You're the RCM (1st meaning ;-) ) -- it's your call...  Unless you're
>planning to put this to a vote?

But, by the second meaning, whatever call I make would be flawed. :-)

I think it really is both.  If you are expecting a direct line to a
developer who will decode your gdb backtraces for you, it could be a
mean place.  If you are expecting someone to explain why there is a
/usr/bin and a /bin, then it could be a helpful place.

cgf

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:38:47PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> >Properly off-topic'ed.
> >
> >On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Dave Korn wrote:
> >
> >>>From: beau
> >>>Sent: 13 April 2005 18:28
> >>
> >>>Without a doubt or a reservation, this cygwin list is the most
> >>>responsive, helpful resource I have ever had the pleasure to rely on.
> >>
> >>Wow! http://cygwin.com/acronyms#WJN !
> >
> >Gettin' chilly down there, eh?  ];->
>
> So, which is it?  responsive and helpful or the most mean-spirited
> mailing list since the dawn of Godwin?

You're the RCM (1st meaning ;-) ) -- it's your call...  Unless you're
planning to put this to a vote?
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Dave Korn]

----Original Message----
>From: Christopher Faylor
>Sent: 13 April 2005 19:44

> On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:38:47PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>> Properly off-topic'ed.
>> 
>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Dave Korn wrote:
>> 
>>>> From: beau
>>>> Sent: 13 April 2005 18:28
>>> 
>>>> Without a doubt or a reservation, this cygwin list is the most
>>>> responsive, helpful resource I have ever had the pleasure to rely on.
>>> 
>>> Wow! http://cygwin.com/acronyms#WJN !
>> 
>> Gettin' chilly down there, eh?  ];->
> 
> So, which is it?  responsive and helpful or the most mean-spirited
> mailing list since the dawn of Godwin?
> 
> cgf



          Yes!


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:38:47PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>Properly off-topic'ed.
>
>On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Dave Korn wrote:
>
>>>From: beau
>>>Sent: 13 April 2005 18:28
>>
>>>Without a doubt or a reservation, this cygwin list is the most
>>>responsive, helpful resource I have ever had the pleasure to rely on.
>>
>>Wow! http://cygwin.com/acronyms#WJN !
>
>Gettin' chilly down there, eh?  ];->

So, which is it?  responsive and helpful or the most mean-spirited
mailing list since the dawn of Godwin?

cgf

RE: offtopic helmet polishing (was Re: rm fails to remove symbolic links to directories)

[Igor Pechtchanski]

Properly off-topic'ed.

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Dave Korn wrote:

> ----Original Message----
> >From: beau
> >Sent: 13 April 2005 18:28
>
> >  Without a doubt or a reservation, this
> > cygwin list is the most responsive, helpful resource I have ever had
> > the pleasure to rely on.
>
>   Wow!  http://cygwin.com/acronyms#WJN !

Gettin' chilly down there, eh?  ];->
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT