Post #151,124
4/14/04 5:40:35 AM
4/14/04 5:42:27 AM
|
Sheesh - How fucking stupid ARE you, Norm?!?
Norm whines: Several family members have developed computer problems and will not take no for an answer. Then leave them WITHOUT ANY frigging answer, ferchrissake! If they're too stupid (of course they are; that only proves they're relatives of yours) to understand that you gotta do your own stuff before theirs, then leave them as they are: Understanding nothing. That's their problem, not yours. ...did very poor on the statistics part. Due in fact to the screwy pop-up Java calculator that they force us to use that lacks statitistcal functions,.. No, due to you not knowing shit about statistics. For the piddling elementary assignments I'm almost sure is what you get in an introductory statistics class, you DON'T NEED a calculator with any "statitistcal functions". ...only works half the time, and when I copied number lists and formulas into it, they got greyed out and refused to work. Half the time the number lists would not drag and drop for me. I have a Statistical Calculator around the house but cannot find it, they said not to use it for the test anyway. Of fucking course not!!! What do you think the test is supposed to be ABOUT -- think they're trying to find out if your CALCULATOR can do statistics?!? Hard to do standard deviations, permintations, etc without a calculator or even tables to lookup. Ooh, poow widdle Nowmy-Wowmy, haf to do hif own wowk! How fucking hard is it, really, to calculate a standard deviation?!? It's not like those test assignments have zillions and zillions of data points, do they? (My guess is, if they're anything like what we used to have, it's five or eight or, at most, a dozen -- right?) Use a frigging paper and pencil, and, yes, a NON-"statistical" calculator. Like this: 1. Calculate the mean by adding all the numbers (ordinary calculators have a "+" button) and then dividing the sum by the number of numbers (ordinary calculators have a "/" button, too). Write down the mean. 2. Calculate each deviation by subtracting each number from the mean (ordinary calculators have a "-" button). (Or do it the other way around; the sign of the deviation doesn't matter.) Write them all down in a list; I'd suggest lining them up in a column below each other, and making sure to leave space for another column to the right of it. 3. Calculate the square of each number in the "deviation" column from step 2 (most ordinary calculators have a "^2" button; if yours doesn't, you'll just have to type in each number twice, with a "*" in between), and write it down (in the next column to the right). 4. Calculate the sum of the "squared-deviations" column from step 3 in the same way you did in step 1 (remember, ordinary calculators have a "+" button). Write down the sum. 5. If the assignment purports to be a complete survey of a "population", divide the square-sum from step 4 by the number of numbers (remember, ordinary calculators have a "/" button); if it is a sample from some "population", divide by the-number-of-numbers-minus-one. If you don't understand what I'm on about, with "complete survey", "population", and "sample", then go with the first alternative; forget the "minus-one" bit. Write down the result. (This is called the "variance", and is the square of the standard deviation that we're after.) 6. Calculate the standard deviation by taking the square root of the variance from step 5 (almost all ordinary calculators have a "SqRt" button; if yours doesn't, you're shit-outta-luck; get another one). There you are: Calculating the standard deviation is so easy, a fucking MONKEY could do it -- WITHOUT any "statistical" calculator! Don't know about the "permintations, etc", though. I ordered a TI scientific/statistics calculator for $16, hope they let me use it in class. I sure could have used it on this screwy test. Guess you "could have used" a sheet with the answers all ready and printed out for you, too, eh? How the fuck do you think you're going to LEARN this shit, if you don't DO it all the way through by yourself?!? Too many things going wrong, I hate this class already, hate it with a passion. I got part 2 to this class after it is over. It is going to be a long 10 weeks, 5 weeks per class. With that attitude, yes, it probably is going to feel like an eternity. The problem isn't with the subject, though; it's with your attitude. I tend to agree with Mark Twain, "There are lies, then there are damned lies, and then there are statistics!" Yeah, he said a lot of funny stuff. Like all such funny quotes, this contains an element of truth -- but it's NOT the WHOLE truth (and I think mr Clemens would agree). Statistics CAN be used to lie, but it doesn't HAVE to; it's pretty much like, say, English in that respect. (I'm sure mr Clemens would agree on this one!) Furthermore, I think you misquoted him: All the "there are"s slow it down, make it feel clumsier and more ponderous than the snappier version without them that you usually see. (I'm fairly sure he would agree on this one, too, and I really don't think he would have gone with a more ponderous version over a snappier one.) I have yet to see an accurate statitical research. That's because you're a moron, and wouldn't know what to look for. "Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element" That's what separates "Corbin Dallas" from Norm, who only speaks one of those.
[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)
Your lies are of Microsoftian Scale and boring to boot. Your 'depression' may be the closest you ever come to recognizing truth: you have no 'inferiority complex', you are inferior - and something inside you recognizes this. - [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=71575|Ashton Brown]
Edited by CRConrad
April 14, 2004, 05:42:27 AM EDT
|
Post #151,139
4/14/04 10:45:23 AM
|
2 additional comments
Norms "permintations" are undoubtably "permutations". They require understanding how to calculate factorial, and knowing when to do it. Again, this is something that you want to do by hand because you need to understand the process.
Also the quote, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics" is not due to Mark Twain. It is due to Disraeli. (Twain said it, but credited it properly.)
Cheers,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #151,169
4/14/04 3:30:26 PM
|
A little help here
a web page or book that describes how to do these things by hand would be helpful. Apparently I am not going to learn how to do statistics by hand at college.
Quote of the day I got the quote from did not credit Disraeli, I may have added two too many "there are" references. I'll take your word for it that Disraeli said it first.
"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #151,176
4/14/04 4:34:01 PM
|
Any introductory statistics book should explain permutations
Of course you have to read it to do any good.
The number of permutations of a set is the number of ways to order it. If the set has n elements, this is n*(n-1)*...*1 which is usually known as n! (! is pronounced, "factorial").
This comes up a lot in elementary statistics. For instance how many subsets of size m are there in a set of size n? Well if we specify a procedure with an equal chance of picking any subset, the answer is the number of ways we can pick a subset, divided by the number of ways that we could pick any particular subset. Our procedure is, "Put them in order, take the first m." There are n! ways of putting them in order. The number of different ways we could pick any particular subset is the number of ways that we could have ordered the ones we picked times the number of ways that we could have ordered the ones we didn't pick. Which is m!*(n-m)!.
The answer, therefore, is n!/(m!*(n-m)!).
Applications of permutations and factorial quickly get more complicated from there. An introductory statistics book should go through the simple ones.
BTW you do know that you can ask the professor questions. If, as you claim, everyone is lost, then ask in front of everyone and you'll do everyone some good. If you suspect that most people get it, then ask the professor in office hours.
I'm not a free tutoring service, don't expect detailed assistance.
Regards,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #151,178
4/14/04 4:45:45 PM
|
Factorials
I know what one is, I used to write functions to create them.
1! = 1.
2! = 2 * 1 = 2.
3! = 3 * 2 * 1 = 6.
4! = 4 * 3 * 2 * 1 = 24.
Let me know if I got that right.
I lost my statitics book some time ago and it has been 15 years since I read it.
All I asked for was a web site or book to be reconmended, not a free tutoring service. I do not wish to have your services for tutoring, free or otherwise.
It looks like our class so far is not covering the intro to statistics, and yes I will be asking questions. Everyone else I talked to are struggling with the test as well, so it would benefit them all if I asked the questions in class.
"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #151,180
4/14/04 5:05:54 PM
|
I should HOPE you got that right
After all I just told you what they were and how to calculate them.
As for a book, what part of, "any introductory Statistics book," do you fail to comprehend? I haven't needed an introductory book for a decade myself, and I have no idea what the current offerings are. But they should all cover this.
If you're worried, ask your professor for a recommendation. After all that is what he is THERE for.
In the meantime, take your fucking whining elsewhere.
Thank you,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #151,188
4/14/04 7:41:02 PM
|
I am just asking questions to learn more.
Why don't you just throw an anchor to a drowning man? That seems to be most of what you've ever done, you and a few of the others. You see someone struggling, so you mock them, pretend to help them, and then bash the hell out of them.
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #151,202
4/14/04 11:05:07 PM
|
Norm, stuff it.
I've met Ben in person. He comes across as a nice guy, and would be quite willing to help somebody.
That is, somebody who hasn't repeatedly shown themselves to be manipulative, abusive, and otherwise somebody who has shown themselves over and over again to be unwilling to take REAL responsibility for their own actions.
I have my own demons to deal with. I've been dealing with them, without spamming crap all over IWETHEY.
Unlike you.
Nobody wins in a butter eating contest
|
Post #151,207
4/14/04 11:43:00 PM
|
I would have reacted differently
had he used a different posting tone and moved the post outside of the flame forum.
I am taking responsibility for my actions, I am asking for help, buying books, searching web sites, talking to classmates, whatever it takes to get me to the next level. I am using the resources at hand to try and solve a major problem. One of those resources happens to be IWETHEY. I did get a book suggestion, one that I already had ordered.
If I did not take responsibility for my actions, I would just simpy quit the class and complain that it was too hard.
Funny how people always bring up the past, think that pointing out someone else's flaws and mistakes makes them better than the one who made the mistakes and has the flaws. Yet when that person person who has the flaws and made the mistakes tries to change or do something to improve himself, he gets mocked, put down, made fun of. What Hypocrites! Apparently some in this group have no idea what forgiveness or compassion means.
You deal with your demons your way, I happen to talk about them so I can deal with them. Just a different style is all. I had a friend who dealt with his demons and did not talk about them, he ended up killing himself, had he told someone he might have been saved. So lesson learned there for me, else I end up six feet under.
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #151,211
4/15/04 1:33:22 AM
|
Blah blah.
Translation: blah blah blah I can't be arsed to think blah blah random personal shite that no-one on ZIWT needs to know blah blah it's the college's fault blah blah appeal to sense of compassion that I don't fucking have blah blah pity me blah blah.
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #152,977
4/28/04 8:05:26 PM
|
Can't contribute positively can you?
Always focusing on the negative side of things. Reading my posts with a negative filter. Tells me why you cannot get along with people in society.
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #153,022
4/29/04 12:17:02 AM
|
WTF?
I get along just fine, arsehole.
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #156,295
5/21/04 11:43:03 PM
|
Prove it
post something positive about me in the flame-off forum. If not, then go back to your hole!
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #156,298
5/21/04 11:57:36 PM
|
You said society
so why the fuck does he need to post something nice about >you<.
This is the kind of content free shit he was complaining about in the first place.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #156,798
5/25/04 12:33:12 AM
|
I am a member of society
am I not? I just wanted to see if he had the potential to post something nice about someone rather than go off on them all the time.
I wanted to see a side of Peter that he seldom shows in these forums. Or at least verify that he has the ability to do so. So yes there was content in my fucking post, even if you missed it.
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #156,804
5/25/04 1:45:55 AM
|
Oh please do fuck off, there's a good chap.
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #156,808
5/25/04 2:06:05 AM
|
I love you, man.
|
Post #156,856
5/25/04 11:56:28 AM
|
Make me!
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #156,857
5/25/04 12:04:35 PM
|
MOM... Peter is being mean again!
--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwethey
Give a man a match, he'll be warm for a minute.
Set him on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life!
|
Post #156,863
5/25/04 12:11:43 PM
|
Leave my mother out of this pukeboy!
Least you tempt me to make more senseless posts! ;)
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #156,305
5/22/04 1:05:28 AM
|
OK. (new thread)
Created as new thread #156304 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=156304|OK.]
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #151,189
4/14/04 7:47:44 PM
4/14/04 8:01:32 PM
|
My educational situation
As for a book, what part of, "any introductory Statistics book," do you fail to comprehend? I haven't needed an introductory book for a decade myself, and I have no idea what the current offerings are. But they should all cover this.
If you're worried, ask your professor for a recommendation. After all that is what he is THERE for.
Gee, lots of them out there, I think I will put the names of them on a dartboard and throw darts at them, it would be more helpful than you've been to me on picking out a good book. I have asked my instructor in email, and SHE, has been ignoring my questions. I even asked for a Syllabus, which is part of her job to give me one, and she refused to give me one. That was the only response I got. I asked nicely, I asked politely, and I explained to her the problems I had with the test. So far, nothing else from her except she said she would not give me a Syllabus. Edit: I did a search on Amazon.com, interesting that books that use statistics in their descriptions come up, but are not actually about statitistics. One book was available for $100USD and the rest where out of stock. Do a search on "Intro to Statistics" and see what pops up. I'd use my college bookstore, but they outsourced it to a web company that sent me the wrong book, and ripped me off of $60USD and refused to refund my money. The college says they are looking into it for the past 3 months or so, but keep making excuses as to why I cannot get a refund or exchange.
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
Edited by orion
April 14, 2004, 08:01:32 PM EDT
|
Post #151,197
4/14/04 10:04:39 PM
|
Thirty seconds on Barnes and Noble
gives me this: [link|http://btobsearch.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?isbn=0071350055&itm=2|Statistics for the Utterly Confused]. Looks like a good introductory statistics book. And it's only about $17. So go grab it. Even if it doesn't up being the best book ever, at least you can be satisfied with the fact that you actually took some action to remedy the trouble you're facing. The college says they are looking into it for the past 3 months or so, but keep making excuses as to why I cannot get a refund or exchange. It's awfully annoying when people just keep making excuses without actually taking any action, isn't it... John. Busy lad.
|
Post #151,199
4/14/04 10:09:47 PM
|
I took action
did a random search at Amazon.com and got both "Statistics for Dummies" and "Statistics for the Utterly Confused". Cheaper than BN.com offered them too. The "dart board" worked this time. :)
Thanks for the suggestion, at least it was some help.
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #151,144
4/14/04 10:54:25 AM
|
Calculators? What calculators?
Our Algebra prof had us solve 4 by 4 complex system of equations IN FRACTIONS, no rounding allowed. No computers to be used, calculators only to be used for =-*/ (I cheated - I used my programmable calculator to compute lowest common denominator and to multiply complex numbers).
The whole point of such assignements is to give you the "feel" of the problem. Any computing power just gets in the way.
--
Buy high, sell sober.
|
Post #151,145
4/14/04 10:57:51 AM
|
OT and OF (off forum)
Love yer .sig!
jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
|
Post #151,146
4/14/04 11:08:48 AM
|
My prof did that one step further
In advanced differential equations we had to solve linear systems of differential equations. The process involved writing it as a matrix, taking a Laplace transform of the matrix, inverting that matrix, taking an inverse Laplace transform of the inverse, and then solving for the initial conditions.
I distinctly remember the experience of trying to solve one problem a dozen times before coming up with the same answer twice. (Unfortunately it wasn't the correct answer...)
That taught me a lot about being careful in algebraic manipulations.
Cheers,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #151,147
4/14/04 11:14:23 AM
|
I remember doing finite-difference solution to diffusion eq
by hand with a non-programmable calculator...
The instructor was rather startled when I turned in that assignment. ;-)
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #151,154
4/14/04 12:44:15 PM
|
That's nothing
My boss keeps a special calculator in his back pocket (we *think*); every day, he pulls out solutions to complex problems in nanoseconds, without pushing a single button.
;)
"There's a set of rules that anything that was in the world when you were born is normal and natural. Anything invented between when you were 15 and 35 is new and revolutionary and exciting, and you'll probably get a career in it. Anything invented after you're 35 is against the natural order of things." Douglas Adams
|
Post #151,158
4/14/04 1:14:29 PM
|
I do the same thing
except its not my pocket I pull the solutions out of.
thanx,
bill
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #151,165
4/14/04 2:15:19 PM
|
Management Information And Storage System
properly abbreviated as "M.I.A.S.S." and pronounced accordingly.
lincoln
"Windows XP has so many holes in its security that any reasonable user will conclude it was designed by the same German officer who created the prison compound in "Hogan's Heroes." - Andy Ihnatko, Chicago Sun-Times
[link|mailto:bconnors@ev1.net|contact me]
|
Post #151,168
4/14/04 3:25:18 PM
|
Not stupid, just lacking education
Then leave them WITHOUT ANY frigging answer, ferchrissake!
If they're too stupid (of course they are; that only proves they're relatives of yours) to understand that you gotta do your own stuff before theirs, then leave them as they are: Understanding nothing.
That's their problem, not yours.
Not understanding how a computer works or how to troubleshoot it is not a sign of stupidity. It is a sign of a lack of education and knowledge in computer science. Some relatives I have thaught to do their own work, and some have learned it on their own.
No, due to you not knowing shit about statistics.
For the piddling elementary assignments I'm almost sure is what you get in an introductory statistics class, you DON'T NEED a calculator with any "statitistcal functions".
Considering that my statistics class was over 15 years ago, and my memory is a bit fuzzy from that era. They did allow us to use a calculator and did not teach us how to do things by hand. Again it is not stupidity, but a lack of education. Had I been taught how to do these problems by hand and keep my skills up to date, it would have been a different story.
Of fucking course not!!!
What do you think the test is supposed to be ABOUT -- think they're trying to find out if your CALCULATOR can do statistics?!?
A calculator cannot do statistics, it takes an operator to operate the calculator properly to do statistics. Gee here I thought you were smart and understood that a calculator is a tool and cannot do things all by itself. It makes about as much sense to me as trying to create a computer program without the use of a development tool like Delphi. Imagine if they took Delphi away from you and then asked you to write Delphi programs anyway. How good a job could you do without that tool?
Ooh, poow widdle Nowmy-Wowmy, haf to do hif own wowk!
How fucking hard is it, really, to calculate a standard deviation?!?
It's not like those test assignments have zillions and zillions of data points, do they? (My guess is, if they're anything like what we used to have, it's five or eight or, at most, a dozen -- right?) Use a frigging paper and pencil, and, yes, a NON-"statistical" calculator. Like this:
1. Calculate the mean by adding all the numbers (ordinary calculators have a "+" button) and then dividing the sum by the number of numbers (ordinary calculators have a "/" button, too). Write down the mean.
2. Calculate each deviation by subtracting each number from the mean (ordinary calculators have a "-" button). (Or do it the other way around; the sign of the deviation doesn't matter.) Write them all down in a list; I'd suggest lining them up in a column below each other, and making sure to leave space for another column to the right of it.
3. Calculate the square of each number in the "deviation" column from step 2 (most ordinary calculators have a "^2" button; if yours doesn't, you'll just have to type in each number twice, with a "*" in between), and write it down (in the next column to the right).
4. Calculate the sum of the "squared-deviations" column from step 3 in the same way you did in step 1 (remember, ordinary calculators have a "+" button). Write down the sum.
5. If the assignment purports to be a complete survey of a "population", divide the square-sum from step 4 by the number of numbers (remember, ordinary calculators have a "/" button); if it is a sample from some "population", divide by the-number-of-numbers-minus-one. If you don't understand what I'm on about, with "complete survey", "population", and "sample", then go with the first alternative; forget the "minus-one" bit. Write down the result. (This is called the "variance", and is the square of the standard deviation that we're after.)
6. Calculate the standard deviation by taking the square root of the variance from step 5 (almost all ordinary calculators have a "SqRt" button; if yours doesn't, you're shit-outta-luck; get another one).
There you are: Calculating the standard deviation is so easy, a fucking MONKEY could do it -- WITHOUT any "statistical" calculator!
Don't know about the "permintations, etc", though.
What part of "The online calculator would not work" did you not understand? Your reading comprehension skills must be worse than mine? I was not allowed to use anything except for that which the Java program provided. Otherwise that would be cheating. I had to do math problems in my head without the use of a calculator and scored pretty good. It was the statistics problems that threw me, I did well in figuring out the mean, that is easy. I just cannot do complex methods in my head without the use of a calculator. Anyway traced my problem with Aleks, apparently I used IE 6.0 with MS's Java VM which apparently has issues with the software they wrote. Like the calculator breaking, looping in the practice questions, etc, all that I had. They said to try Netscape with JRE 1.4.1, not JRE 1.4.2 as it has issues with that. BTW I was told I was not allowed to use paper and pencil, so I didn't use them.
Guess you "could have used" a sheet with the answers all ready and printed out for you, too, eh?
How the fuck do you think you're going to LEARN this shit, if you don't DO it all the way through by yourself?!?
Perhaps you have a point there, I hope my instructor teaches us how to do these things by hand. I admit I do not know how to do that, with the exception of the mean, factorials, etc.
With that attitude, yes, it probably is going to feel like an eternity.
The problem isn't with the subject, though; it's with your attitude.
I talked to other students who seem to feel the same way. I got 140 pages to read by monday and so far they aren't talking about how to do these things by hand. Interestingly enough the resource page has Excel spreadsheets to download. I guess they do not teach us how to do these things by hand anymore?
"Who else wants to negotiate?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #151,225
4/15/04 2:49:19 AM
|
Stupid, just like you.
Norm quotes me:Then leave them WITHOUT ANY frigging answer, ferchrissake!
If they're too stupid (of course they are; that only proves they're relatives of yours) to understand that you gotta do your own stuff before theirs, then leave them as they are: Understanding nothing.
That's their problem, not yours. and replies: Not understanding how a computer works or how to troubleshoot it is not a sign of stupidity. It is a sign of a lack of education and knowledge in computer science. Some relatives I have thaught to do their own work, and some have learned it on their own. Further down in his whine, he asks: Your reading comprehension skills must be worse than mine? Don't think so, Bub.
[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)
Your lies are of Microsoftian Scale and boring to boot. Your 'depression' may be the closest you ever come to recognizing truth: you have no 'inferiority complex', you are inferior - and something inside you recognizes this. - [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=71575|Ashton Brown]
|
Post #152,978
4/28/04 8:13:09 PM
|
Ah yeah, but you ignored the rest of my post
Let me focus on a part of your post I ignored:
> "Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
That's what separates "Corbin Dallas" from Norm, who only speaks one of those.
Referring, of course to my posts. Which aren't spoken, but written. I am dealing with someone who apparently does not understand the difference between speaking and writing.
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #153,052
4/29/04 7:57:32 AM
|
That's because I don't give a shit. Noone does. So STFU, OK?
|
Post #156,294
5/21/04 11:42:05 PM
|
That is where you are wrong and I can prove it
if you didn't give a shit, you wouldn't have even bothered to post to me in the flame forum. You simply would have ignored my post like most everyone else did. If you said you don't give a shit, you must be lying.
Therefore you must give a shit, for some fucking reason. You apparently care, but about what, nobody knows.
As for me shutting up, never! Only time I will ever shut up is when I am dead.
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
Post #151,177
4/14/04 4:38:12 PM
|
Looking for good research
That's because you're a moron, and wouldn't know what to look for.
So let me ask you, what is good research? Wait, don't answer, based on your flamage and short remarks obviously you do not know, let me enlighten you: There is a set of standards called the scientific method, these standards have nine characteristcs. Let me explain further: The purpose must be clearly defined. The research process must be detailed. They must thoroughly plan the research process. They must apply high ethical standards. They must reveal limitations. There must be adequate analysis for decision maker's needs. Findings must be presented unambiguously. The conclusions must be justified. Also the researcher's experience must be reflected. Research articles that lack these characterists, I must reject them. Maybe lacking the characterists I outline may be good enough for someone like you, but not for me. It is like trying to find a needle in a haystack, so much bad research articles exist out there, like the Windows verses Linux research studies that Microsoft had done. If they do not meet these requirements I do not see them as being accurate nor do I see them as being any good at all. Had you known this, you could have just posted it. Yet you did not, and chose to flame me instead.
"What's the use of saving life when you see what you do with it?" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"
|
