Re: Surrogate Factoring Solution
From: C. Bond (cbond_at_ix.netcom.com)
Date: 03/11/05
- Next message: David Eather: "Re: SF: Simpler derivation"
- Previous message: Max Power: "Modular cryptography for GSM celluar telephony -- aka is GSM crypto upgradable/futureproof ...?"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Surrogate Factoring Solution"
- Next in thread: William Hughes: "Re: Surrogate Factoring Solution"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:42:53 GMT
jstevh@msn.com wrote:
[snip]
> Deep down I have a bad feeling about an idea, but even I, at times,
> find myself holding on to it, versus just junking ideas that fail.
>
> But usually I'm a good chunker.
[snip]
> I do admit that at times I too will hold on to an idea long past the
> time to do the chunking.
>
> Chunking ideas is a valuable skill that you can lose if you don't keep
> at it.
>
> My chunking skills seem to be a little flawed lately.
>
> If an idea fails, chunk it.
Don't be so modest. You are very good at "chunking" -- also at "hurling"
and "dumping".
> The people who dominate the threads repeating the same old lies, over
> and over, and over again, tend to shift the point of view of others to
> their position.
Well, take a look at the title of this thread: Surrogate Factoring
Solution. Is it true that you have solved the problem? No? Then YOU are the
liar and there stands the proof. Where is any evidence of the lies of these
nameless others?
[snip]
> The reality is that posters who reply obsessivly to me are trying to
> control my behavior, and they're too stupid to realize it doesn't work.
No one is trying to control your behavior. What they are doing is more like
cleaning the street after a donkey parade.
> I think that when I stop posting for a while they congratulate
> themselves telling themselves that they must be why.
You think a lot of deranged thoughts. I don't recall anyone suggesting that
his posts caused you to stop posting. I do recall suggestions that you were
probably drunk.
> Then I start posting again, like when I'm brainstorming, and they
> furiously start up yet again.
>
> The process has played out over and over again over a period of years.
And you still can't handle simple math.
> Some readers seem to think that I'm the guy who can't get it, when I
> get what I want, time after time.
If you want failure, you've gotten plenty. If you want criticism, it's
there. If you want to be identified as a crank, crackpot or troll, you have
provided ample evidence. If you want to be regarded as a competent
mathematician or a decent human being -- you lose!
> It's the posters who reply to me to control the newsgroups who
> continually fail.
Maybe it isn't sci.math posters who are attemptin control. Maybe it's
aliens with their thought projection capability, or the CIA with its mind
control transmissions, or the FBI with the implants they place while you're
asleep.
-- There are two things you must never attempt to prove: the unprovable -- and the obvious. -- Democracy: The triumph of popularity over principle. -- http://www.crbond.com
- Next message: David Eather: "Re: SF: Simpler derivation"
- Previous message: Max Power: "Modular cryptography for GSM celluar telephony -- aka is GSM crypto upgradable/futureproof ...?"
- In reply to: jstevh_at_msn.com: "Re: Surrogate Factoring Solution"
- Next in thread: William Hughes: "Re: Surrogate Factoring Solution"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
