They didn't have the graphs on the calculator back then. I had to use the Commodore 64 for that.
And wrote a "yuck" BASIC program. It was that, or Assembler Language in the monitor.
I think the Amiga had a C compiler.
Glen
Now you can PROVE your nerdliness
- (FuManChu)
- (61)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 10:56:20 AM EST
KNEEL, MORTAL!
- (inthane-chan)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 11:06:43 AM EST
That's unpossible! 98 Nerd King God
- (Silverlock)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 01:42:40 PM EST
Awww. Only an 87.
-NT
- (imric)
- (5)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 11:14:56 AM EST
82
-NT
- (bepatient)
- (2)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 01:33:35 PM EST
I fault WVU.
- (imric)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 01:43:48 PM EST
Me also
-NT
- (bluke)
- Jan. 20, 2005, 06:45:25 AM EST
Me too
-NT
- (Arkadiy)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 01:45:46 PM EST
Same
-NT
- (broomberg)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 07:07:55 PM EST
Got 75%.
- (jake123)
- (7)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 11:41:52 AM EST
That depends on your definition of "badly"...
-NT
- (inthane-chan)
- (6)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 11:43:15 AM EST
Pretty much
- (jake123)
- (5)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 11:44:33 AM EST
I had the opposite problem.
- (inthane-chan)
- (4)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 11:47:12 AM EST
The first time I took a purity test ....
- (Silverlock)
- (3)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 11:56:11 AM EST
My result was so high...
- (broomberg)
- (2)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 07:09:12 PM EST
Somehow, I'm not surprised at this, Barry. ;-)
-NT
- (n3jja)
- (1)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 08:21:55 PM EST
The thing about purity tests
- (drewk)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 11:45:30 PM EST
I didn't know I was this big a loser. 87
- (mmoffitt)
- (1)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 12:02:43 PM EST
*shakes hand*
- (imric)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 12:04:39 PM EST
53
-NT
- (drewk)
- (2)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 12:07:37 PM EST
Take it again and cheat this time! ;-)
-NT
- (lincoln)
- (1)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 03:30:58 PM EST
Re: Take it again and cheat this time! ;-)
- (Steven A S)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 03:40:24 PM EST
I don't know
- (tjsinclair)
- (4)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 12:11:00 PM EST
Ooh, irony
-NT
- (drewk)
- (3)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 12:19:42 PM EST
On the other hand
- (tjsinclair)
- (2)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 01:59:03 PM EST
Did you break the link there, too?
-NT
- (drewk)
- (1)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 06:47:41 PM EST
Nope
- (tjsinclair)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 07:30:44 PM EST
Sheesh. 93 - Nerd King.
-NT
- (Another Scott)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 12:40:48 PM EST
This test would be easy to cheat . .
- (Andrew Grygus)
- (5)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 01:44:52 PM EST
I'm a Total loser - 91!
-NT
- (broomberg)
- (4)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 07:15:40 PM EST
Funny, I got a 22
-NT
- (drewk)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 07:19:19 PM EST
I'm a Loser. 81. :-/
-NT
- (Another Scott)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 07:27:48 PM EST
69! My favorite number! ;-)
-NT
- (n3jja)
- (1)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 08:27:23 PM EST
Yup: nerd
-NT
- (drewk)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 11:49:12 PM EST
63 - Low Rank Nerd
-NT
- (Steven A S)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 03:06:04 PM EST
56. Phew, I must have a *bit* of a life :)
-NT
- (Meerkat)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 03:32:40 PM EST
What? Only a 74%? Something's gotta be wrong.
- (Yendor)
- (1)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 04:07:38 PM EST
No, by using that link . . .
- (Andrew Grygus)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 08:06:23 PM EST
Nerdier than I thought! - 90%
-NT
- (jbrabeck)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 04:55:42 PM EST
Same here
- (Nightowl)
- (1)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 05:22:51 PM EST
And John is....
- (Nightowl)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 10:53:43 PM EST
Re: Now you can PROVE your nerdliness
- (Steve Lowe)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 05:33:38 PM EST
61
-NT
- (daemon)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 06:03:39 PM EST
Re: Now you can PROVE your nerdliness
- (SpiceWare)
- (1)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 07:08:09 PM EST
You should have gotten more points with your ani-gif. :-)
-NT
- (Another Scott)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 07:10:26 PM EST
64, but I knew that already.
-NT
- (n3jja)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 07:28:07 PM EST
70.
- (static)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 07:59:43 PM EST
Bow down, foolish mortals.
- (admin)
- (5)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 09:22:17 PM EST
You should ask your wife what she thinks. :-)
-NT
- (static)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 09:33:01 PM EST
Was there any doubt? You are **admin** after all. :-)
-NT
- (Another Scott)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 09:44:03 PM EST
Bow to your new overlord...
- (folkert)
- (2)
- Jan. 20, 2005, 01:46:20 AM EST
:-)
-NT
- (Another Scott)
- Jan. 20, 2005, 09:27:36 AM EST
Do you want the IQ test now?
-NT
- (gdaustin)
- Jan. 20, 2005, 09:34:44 PM EST
84 for me.
-NT
- (a6l6e6x)
- Jan. 19, 2005, 10:53:32 PM EST
Supreme Nerd God
- (gdaustin)
- (1)
- Jan. 20, 2005, 12:09:37 AM EST
That's one of the things that lowered my actual score
- (Steven A S)
- Jan. 20, 2005, 09:34:33 AM EST
Oh dearie dearie me.
- (pwhysall)
- (1)
- Jan. 20, 2005, 10:42:09 AM EST
HP 41C
- (gdaustin)
- Jan. 20, 2005, 09:33:44 PM EST
WTF... 92 ?!?
- (CRConrad)
- Jan. 21, 2005, 02:19:46 AM EST
97%....
- (slugbug)
- (1)
- Jan. 22, 2005, 07:21:30 PM EST
I.C.L.R.P.D. (new thread)
- (folkert)
- Jan. 23, 2005, 10:49:30 AM EST
Not fair
- (tuberculosis)
- Feb. 8, 2005, 02:33:37 PM EST
