Re: A basic question about hashing

From: Mok-Kong Shen (mok-kong.shen_at_t-online.de)
Date: 09/10/04 

Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 10:58:01 +0200

Tom St Denis wrote:

> Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
>
>> Tom St Denis wrote:
>>
>>> Starting at "However, I ....".
>>>
>>> That's an announcement. You are stating this as fact. Bryan
>>> legitimately called into question what research [or just pen to paper
>>> work] you have performed to come to these conclusions.
>>
>> If I propose something or put up an opinion for examination
>> by others, then it is just that. If anyone finds it wrong
>> or has other opinions, then he can say so. There is no
>> necessity of my saying how I get to these, how much work
>> lies behind that, or perhaps even how many years I have
>> lived before coming up with such ideas. There could be just
>> none. BTW, one knows e.g. that plenty of good ideas in
>> history were born just by intuition (or thru dreams, if
>> you like). Got it?
>
>
> Shut up. You're talking out your ass again. Sure many ideas seem to be
> born out of inspiration the truth of the matter is many are based on
> previous lines of thought.

Could you refrain from using your dirty words??? This is
a forum for civilized people!

>
> I'm sure Newton didn't sit down one day and write his part of Calculus
> without seeing previous works.
>
> Point is you can't randomly just post ideas then when people attempt to
> discuss them you stall them, never explain why you came up with the
> ideas or what they're based on... then expect a pleasant discussion.

First, suppose something just comes from 'intuition' to you. I
suppose you know what that term, as one commonly employs, means.
Could you explain how that comes in 'scientific' terms? (The
neuroscientists are not yet able to do that.) Roughtly speaking,
such could come from e.g. certain very very remote analogies
or hints, which don't have much sense to present to others.
(For example, seeing childrem playing could remind me that
I haven't yet took a vacation this year. Does it make a
sensible/required topic for me to detail to an acquitance
how I came to suddenly thinking of my vacation?) Second, it is
an idea/statement as such that is to be discussed, i.e. whether
it's right/wrong etc. and not the psychological process of the
generation of it. Anyway, have you seen in a math book theorems
that not only have proofs (exact steps leading from assumptions
to the end results) but also explanations of how the inventors
came to the ideas underlying the theorems? It is believed by
quite many that certain sophisticated math theorems came to
their end form through long-winded paths, involving a number
of false starts and corrections of diverse intial errors. But I
don't see any such stuff in the math textbooks that I have read.

>
> Quite frankly who the hell are you to sit down, write some "truth" and
> not have anyone question it? You don't get that right. If you don't
> like the questions either shut up or put up.

See above. On the other hand, I could in the present case
in fact give some explanations of how I came to think of certain
statements in my previous posts. Conditions for that are: (1)
You could successfully counter what I said in the first paragraph
above to convince me that such are indeed 'necessary'. (2) You
point out exactly for which sentences of mine you need such
explanations (i.e. a trace of my mind in coming up to the
ideas underlying them) in order to minimize the bandwidth.

>
>> If one has anything technical to say, I certainly have
>> no objection but would on the contrary very much apprecaite
>> it. Everything else is just wasting of bandwidth due to
>> personal aninosity etc and reflecting the meanness of one's
>> character in my view.
>
>
> This isn't personal. It's reality. You can't just randomly blurt out
> "facts", not explain the reasoning and expect an honest and serious
> discussion to follow.
>
> For starters, most of such "ideas" are usually just plain wrong and not
> worth the discussion. Second they most often come from the lame trolls
> in the group looking to stir up trouble. Third, if you actually have
> reasoning behind your post and your wrong maybe someone will notice and
> help correct your thinking.

See above. Let me also caution you that, if in future others
want (similarly as you now) to know in details how you come
to certain ideas that you post, you would be very busy dealing
with these (in my view) irrelevant questions and some sort of
psychology discucssions would result, e.g. questions of whether
it is really reasonable/justified to draw an analogy between
X and Y, i.e. isn't that quite too far fetched etc., and much
bandwidth will be wasted. (Note that analogies that one
explicitly writes down for other persons to read have to be
plausible/reasonable to some non-trivial extent but that
requirement doesn't exist in one's 'own' reasoning in one's mind.

M. K. Shen
-----------------------------
P.S. An earlier post was sent due to inadvertent premature
clicking of the send button.