RE: Functional quantum computer?
He's an existance proof that people can be intelligent in some areas, yet astoundingly obtuse in others. Peter [Jim: It's ok that you have no problem with your ineffective methods of giving pointers to articles, but your wasting your own and other's time - there's simply no reason for people to follow your links, since they are generally useless]
---------- From: Reese[SMTP:reeza@flex.com] Reply To: Reese Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 1:55 AM To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Functional quantum computer?
Jimbo's a real piece of work, ain't he?
At 04:18 PM 1/8/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Trei, Peter wrote:
Jim seems to have a real hard time with this concept.
By the bitching you and others are making it's not I who has the
problem.
I have none (zero, nadah, null, nil).
Last week, I privately mailed him a polite letter on
And I told you to stop, you didn't. Don't give me consideration then don't bitch when you don't get it.
____________________________________________________________________
Before a larger group can see the virtue of an idea, a smaller group must first understand it.
"Stranger Suns" George Zebrowski
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Trei, Peter wrote:
[Jim: It's ok that you have no problem with your ineffective methods of giving pointers to articles, but your wasting your own and other's time - there's simply no reason for people to follow your links, since they are generally useless]
Actually, not *entirely* useless. Usually right after jim talks about an article and posts a link that doesn't point at it, someone else will post a correct link. If Jim just shut up, some of these stories probably would escape our notice. In the course of correcting his errors, people do provide useful information. Bear
At 8:04 AM -0800 1/9/01, Ray Dillinger wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Trei, Peter wrote:
[Jim: It's ok that you have no problem with your ineffective methods of giving pointers to articles, but your wasting your own and other's time - there's simply no reason for people to follow your links, since they are generally useless]
Actually, not *entirely* useless. Usually right after jim talks about an article and posts a link that doesn't point at it, someone else will post a correct link. If Jim just shut up, some of these stories probably would escape our notice. In the course of correcting his errors, people do provide useful information.
Your definition of "useful" is different from mine. I believe lists like ours should primarily be about discussions and points of view, not a third-hand CNET or Register or Slashdot. There are many Web sources of breaking news (not that a lot of the "functional quantum computer" sorts of stories are usually breaking news...). Personally, I like it when someone finds a news item, provides a detailed URL, even quotes (in ASCII, not MIME!) a paragraph or two, and then comments on it and connects it to Cypherpunks issues. Merely dumping out "general science" items, with general URLs, is just plain abusing the list. --Tim May -- Timothy C. May tcmay@got.net Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns
Right. Most news organizations nowadays provide some kind of "alert" service. Wired News has one that lets readers choose to be alerted by name of author or keyword: http://www.wired.alerts.com/wired/add_alert.jsp These, to buttress your point, are better mechanisms to be alerted to relevant articles than the cpunks list is. -Declan On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 09:42:07AM -0800, Tim May wrote:
Your definition of "useful" is different from mine. I believe lists like ours should primarily be about discussions and points of view, not a third-hand CNET or Register or Slashdot. There are many Web sources of breaking news (not that a lot of the "functional quantum computer" sorts of stories are usually breaking news...).
Personally, I like it when someone finds a news item, provides a detailed URL, even quotes (in ASCII, not MIME!) a paragraph or two, and then comments on it and connects it to Cypherpunks issues.
Merely dumping out "general science" items, with general URLs, is just plain abusing the list.
--Tim May -- Timothy C. May tcmay@got.net Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 08:04:18AM -0800, Ray Dillinger wrote:
Actually, not *entirely* useless. Usually right after jim talks about an article and posts a link that doesn't point at it, someone else will post a correct link. If Jim just shut up, some of these stories probably would escape our notice. In the course of correcting his errors, people do provide useful information.
Yeah in a: "Gee, if I didn't sideswipe that truck and crash into this utility pole, I never would have noticed that quarter on the ground!" sort of way. -- ___ ___ . . ___ \ / |\ |\ \ _\_ /__ |-\ |-\ \__
participants (5)
-
Declan McCullagh -
Izaac -
Ray Dillinger -
Tim May -
Trei, Peter