Death penalty for LISP ? [ was: Re: Is LISP dying? ] 
Author Message
 Death penalty for LISP ? [ was: Re: Is LISP dying? ]

Quote:

>No need to apologize, Tom.

Agreed.  I'm glad he saw the need to do so, though; it confirms his
politeness.

Quote:
>Some falsehoods need to answered with the truth, no matter how off-topic it
>may be.

More importantly, a polite defence is always an appropriate response to an
attack (even leaving aside issues of known truth for the sake of argument).

My response was not to Zimmer's defence, but to "df"'s repeated attack.
He didn't even bother responding to the defence, but merely repeated his
attack.  If the thread's off topic, and you have nothing new to add, leave
it be.

Quote:
>- Bill
>> Hello William,
>> I apologize for being so far off topic, and for the cross posting.  That


>> > Yeesh.  This junk is SO far off topic it's sick.  Can it, okay?  This

--
-William "Billy" Tanksley


Fri, 01 Feb 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Death penalty for LISP ? [ was: Re: Is LISP dying? ]

Quote:

> Many years ago there was a CP/M program called Kamas, which started life as
> a BBS program, and evolved into an outline program for writing. It was a
> variant of STOIC, and its True was a 1 in the least-significant bit, i.e.
> Odd numbers were true and Even numbers were false.

This was also true of VAXen using VMS.  It was kind of nice, compared to UNIX
practice, because then you could have many informative "success" return codes
as well as "failure" return codes.

--
The strongest human instinct is to impart information, the
second is to resist it. --Kenneth Grahame



Fri, 01 Feb 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Death penalty for LISP ? [ was: Re: Is LISP dying? ]

Quote:




> >> > Doesn't the bible also say "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" and
> >> > specify communinal stoning to death for such offenses as {*filter*}ery and
> >> > violating the the sabbath? Christians abandoned stoning for burning at
> >> > the stake.

> >> It's my understanding that that directive is more properly translated as,
> >> "Thou shalt not suffer a poisoner to live."

> >A better literal translation, but not better in meaning.

> Why do you believe so?  I don't recognise the root, and that was written a
> LONG time ago.  The root is used in quite a few other places, none of
> which make anything very clear.

I read very litle Hebrew. I was passing on information from a learned
friend, confirmed by my brother-in-law, a rabbi.

Quote:

> >The term refers
> >to a poisoner of minds, a corruptor. Christians in power in formerly
> >pagan Europe called them witches, and treated then the same way.

> Paul spoke to pagans on numerous occasions, and not only didn't kill them
> (probably a good publicity move :), he spoke of their deities with
> respect, and classed his God in with them (as the Unknown God).  Anyone
> who does otherwise is obviously failing to understand, and the failure is
> in their own {*filter*}y hands.

Consider "I am the Lord thy God; thou shall have no other god before
me." That doesn't sound like a claim to be the only god. Rather, the
primary one.

Quote:

> Interestingly enough, some of the strongest words in the NT are directed
> against poisoners -- the translation in KJV is "sorcerors", but the Greek
> word was "pharmacologia" -- studiers of {*filter*}.

Pobably a coincidence. The source language was different.

Quote:

> I have no reason for or against to believe that the word translated
> "witch" in the OT means anything similar to "sorceror" in the NT.  Nor
> have you.

> >Remember, when Saul was in trouble, he consulted the Witch of Endor. To
> >punish him, God gave his throne to David.

> He consulted "a woman who had a familiar spirit." Not the same word (in
> Hebrew), and not even a close form.  And he was punished for consulting
> her, not for failing to kill her.  Altogether, VERY poor evidence for your
> reading of "...not suffer a witch to live."

Of course he was punished for consulting her. I thought I had implied
that. I can't locate the "Thou shalt not" passage, but it's much before
Kings.

Quote:

> >Jerry

> --
> -William "Billy" Tanksley

I wish you love and peace.

Jerry



Fri, 01 Feb 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Death penalty for LISP ? [ was: Re: Is LISP dying? ]

Quote:

[snip]

> Given their techical prowess, I think we should accept that
> their measurements were more accurate than the mockers suggest.

> Humbly,
> Bruce Hoyt

Technical prowess is not the issue. (We consistently underrate the
capabilities of ancient peoples.) The issue is on of the chroniclers'
accuracy. (We seem to overrate that whenever the subject is the Bible.)

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art       |      Let's talk about what
of making what you want      |      you need; you may see
from things you can get.     |      how to do without it.
---------------------------------------------------------



Fri, 01 Feb 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Death penalty for LISP ? [ was: Re: Is LISP dying? ]
Quote:

> Many years ago there was a CP/M program called Kamas, which started life as
> a BBS program, and evolved into an outline program for writing. It was a
> variant of STOIC, and its True was a 1 in the least-significant bit, i.e.
> Odd numbers were true and Even numbers were false.

> Walter Rottenkolber
> -----------------------------------------------------------

Hmmm... Two truths make a flasehood. At least, two falsehoods don't make
a truth. (I assume addition here.)

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art       |      Let's talk about what
of making what you want      |      you need; you may see
from things you can get.     |      how to do without it.
---------------------------------------------------------



Fri, 01 Feb 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Death penalty for LISP ? [ was: Re: Is LISP dying? ]

Quote:

> > I think is plain that diameter was rounded up as
> >  9.7 * PI = 30.46 ; 9.5 * PI = 29.8  so all matches

We often over-rate ourselves. The ancients were not stupid.

Solomon was no dummy. Although the science of the day, including
mathematics, was not advanced, the technology used to build the
temple, and this cast basin in particular, was astounding. The
Solomonic temple represents one of the greatest architectural
and technical works of the ancient world. It was known far and
wide. Anyone considering the account in 1 Kings 5 - 7 would do
well to give credit where credit is due.

Casting such a large object involved several very difficult
technical problems: supporting the mould so that it did not
crack during pouring and cooling, ensuring even cooling so that
the basin itself did not crack (this is extremely difficult with
such a large object), heating such a large amount of bronze,
pouring the molten bronze into the mould, to mention a few. A
study of the technical problems of casting in bronze over the
last 3 centuries will indicate the advanced technical skills
known and used by Solomon's workers.

So let us not assume they were dummies. Surely their
measurements must have been a great deal more accurate than
those who mock PI = 3, a figure the mockers infer from the
measurements given in the account. The inference is too hasty.

The diameter of the basin is stated as 10 cubits and using a
line around it measured 30 cubits. It was a hand-breadth (1/6
cubit) thick. Since it was shaped like the brim of a cup, like a
lily blossom, it is reasonable to think that the line used to
measure the circumference was stretched around the exterior of
the basin just below the brim. Depending on the exact shape of
the rim, it is reasonable to assume that the rim extended
between one hand-breadth and 3/2 hand-breadth beyond the
external circumference of the basin (draw a picture and you will
see this is a reasonable assumption). This yields between 30 /
9.667 = 3.103 and 30 / 9.5 = 3.158 for PI.

Given their techical prowess, I think we should accept that
their measurements were more accurate than the mockers suggest.

Humbly,
Bruce Hoyt



Sat, 02 Feb 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Death penalty for LISP ? [ was: Re: Is LISP dying? ]

Quote:
Bernd Paysan  writes:

        [ deleted ]

Quote:
> While I don't believe in Gods or devils, I'm quite sure that this thread
> is directly from hell. It gets top scores on my "Troll of the year"
> list. Let this thread die!

> --
> Bernd Paysan
> "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
> http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/

As usual, Bernd is right on the money. A bas religious arguments!

--
Julian V. Noble

"Elegance is for tailors!"    -- Ludwig Boltzmann



Sat, 02 Feb 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 433 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29]

 Relevant Pages 
 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software