Re: [OT] Live, the Universe and Fish

Arien Malec the Firebug ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), a High
Priest of the Rippling Neurotic Grit buzzed:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tina Hall) wrote in
> news:MSGID_2=3A2437=2F22.13 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> Arien Malec the Knifefighter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]),

>>> That's perhaps a bit scary -- Tina with rampant sigs.
>>
>> Um. Why? They'll be 4 lines at most.
>
> Still rampant.

If I had a sig to play with, I might forget about playing with
attributions...

> [rng generator]
>> Starting with 234 "random", 85 "number", 138 "generator"
>> words, from which the thing that re- writes the relevant file
>> choses them.
>
> Is this something built into your newsreader, or something you
> wrote, or what?

I put together something that re-writes the file that my software
is configured to use as a greeting phrase (for Fido it's normally
something like 'Hello <username/pseudo/fullname/whatever', for
usenet I use it for attributions) for this newsgroup.

XP can do random 'good buys' (which I could disguise as a sig if
the trailing space wasn't killed off somewhere on the way), but
not choose several different random words for one purpose.

(Suggestions added.)

>> Not sure whether Gent fits, but will add it for now.
>
> You don't think the RNG is a gentleman?

I don't think He's a gazelle either, but my main aim is really
silly random combinations. Gentleman was in it already, gent just
sounds odd.

> You have ghost? Ghoul? Ghast? Gibe? Gibblet?

Had ghost and gibe. Ghoul (gent, and gibbon) added. What are
ghasts and gibblets?

>>> Which is the objectionable part?
>>
>> The few ways of being sane. That'd mean all the normal
>> people were clones of each other, or only a few normal
>> people exist, as all people are different.
>
> It depends on if those different people are sane or not.

Huh? Just substitute normal for sane, if you prefer.

>>> "A really nice man with honorable intentions" is what a
>>> nice girl is supposed to find and go out with.
>>
>> Oh, why did never anyone tell me? (I used to be a nice girl.
>> Honestly.)
>
> [should be: why didn't anyone ever tell]

Why? Anyone might have told someone else...

> Anyway, there are no nice men with honorable intentions, or at
> least very few, so it's rather an impossible task.

You mean all the nice men have dishonorable intentions, and all
the nasty men have honorable intentions? Sounds like out of a
soap opera.

>> Why should I let him drive me anywhere, though? Does that
>> mean I have to marry people wo give me a lift? I don't think
>> I'll ever get a lift anywhere on that condition.
>
> Oh, the twists of logic. My brain circuits are frying.

Sorry.

> Yes, to get married, you will have to find a nice man with
> honorable intentions

You mean I can't just marry anyone I like?

> who will give you a lift to the courthouse/church/wherever one
> gets married in Germany without first meeting you.

Why mustn't he first meet me? You mean he'd bolt otherwise? (I
would.)

> This will happen at 14:32 on 6/5/2006 (take your pick as to
> whether that's a European date or an American).

I don't think so.

>> I'm not sure. The second later is when the YASD has
>> happened, after all...
>
> When that happens, yes. But when you are thinking "this is a
> stupid thing to do" by evidence you stop doing it, whereas I
> think *this* time is an exception.

I expected lots of exceptions from it being stupid when eating
those glowing corpses with the MfMo. I still have to fight the
urge even after supposedly learning that lesson again.

[higly advanced technology, magic]
>>> The kind so far beyond what one is used to that not only do
>>> you not know how it works, you can't understand how you
>>> might discover how it might work.
>>
>> Hmmm... Technically it's still not magic, though, but the
>> theory is the same for magic, I think.
>
> If you invert the logic (invalid, but perhaps true), you get
> the statement that magic is just technology that we don't
> understand.

Which it isn't. It might be a science we don't understand.

> That is, it's technology from some point of view that we simply
> can't understand how to understand.

Technology is some device, magic doesn't use any devices. Just
like an extra arm or something. If you use a remote control to
drive a toy-car around, it's technology, if you use your mind
(directly) to move it around, it's magic.

> Or, to put it another way, if you did learn to make things move
> about with your mind, and could show that you could do it,
> pretty soon, all the scientists would jump on it, physical laws
> would be determined, and it would all stop being magic.

It wouldn't really be 'magic' in the first place [*], you'd just
still need a name to call the ability to do such stuff, and
'magic' does just fine to evade lengthy descriptions.

[*] There's no magic.
 - By one definition, it's all the mythical unexplainable stuff.
 - By another definition it's just something to do things with,
even when it's understood (see Fantasy tales with whole orders of
wizards and similar).

In the second definition, it couldn't really be called 'magic',
because basically it's the first definition, and as you say, when
it's explained, it's no longer magic. The problem is, it still
needs a name, so we might as well stick with 'magic'. 'Ability to
do things without doing them physically, and not involving
technology or other devices' seems a bit long. And
atdtwdtpanitood is an awful abbreviation. Panitood sounds nice
enough. 'Not poitood' isn't all that bad, either ('and not'
replaced with 'or'). Hey, now we know the term for the opposite
of magic. <g>

[fried eggs or fried chicken?]
>> The whole question is absurd, that's my whole point. :)
>
> Well, it points out the notion of fuzzy borders. (Over hear,
> it's red, over there, orange, but when does red stop and when
> does orange begin?)

How should I know. I hardly see the difference between green and
yellow with some of these little computer-lamps (LEDs? forgot
what they're called), at least I name them differently than other
people. :)

That's basically just a matter of opinion...

> "tong" is a variant of "tongs". It's also the deep peal of a
> bell (like a dong). Or a tine.

Ah. Now I wonder what a tine is. <g>

Tina