 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
They demolished it because they can't really see the point of sports, and the noise was annoying the people who do the real work at the school. They let York have it.
U of T is easily Canada's finest university and is pretty well known. |
That's bullshit, no one I know considers UofT the finest -- virtually everyone I know would easily name the University of Waterloo to be Canada's finest.
They have the highest admission standards, richest alumni, and is a world-renown university.
The UofT these days is jack of all trades, master of none. It's a generic university that just happens to be quite old with some past accomplishments when it was one of the only universities in Canada with funding. Today it has a lot more competition and is a lacking institution, a relic of the past.
IBM hires more people from the UofC than the UofT, and the UofT is local. 
quote:
You are the kind of guy who will work all his life to earn money which he then spends on a massive and expensive stereo system that he then proceeds to play Rod Stewart on. |
Isn't that you? IIRC, you're the one who prided yourself on being a snobbish audiophile.
I don't need a high-end stereo, I know how to intelligently buy components to the point where it sounds great to me and I don't need any more. My money would be invested or spent on computers, not on stupid stereos.
Plus I'll work my way up management chains in rich, wealthy fields and will likely make more money than you ever will as a philosophy instructor. And the sick thing is, I'll enjoy it, too.
You'll still be ranting to stoned frosh about Plato, and I'll be on a yacht in the Carribean playing DOOM 9. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
 |
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
While the UofC may not rank highly in McLean's controversial ratings, and while their philosophy department isn't "established", they have many first-class programs in fields that you couldn't even begin to understand, though you make an ass out of yourself repeatedly arguing about them on Apolyton. |
This is funny.
I hardly ever get involved in serious tech arguments because I don't have the training and because they're pretty boring, truth be told.
But one does not have to be trained in any science, let alone computer science, to call BS on some of your daft comments. Most of what we argue about requires no specialized knowledge at all.
Example:
You: "Who needs a system wide spell checker? What a waste of space and processing power!"
Me: "People who can't spell."
You: "It's still a waste of resources."
Me: "Only if you can spell, in which case you can turn it off."
You: "But who cares about spelling on internet forums?"
Me: "I do, since the use of correct spelling is a courtesy to others. It makes one's prose easier to read, and one can read it faster."
You: "That's useless."
Me: "Making yourself clearly and easily understood is useless??"
And it goes on for another 25 posts while you try to rationalize the fact that you've said something completely stupid.
Why do I respond? Well, I get bored, and it's fun to see how far you will go.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
|
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
My point was actually conceded by other people who actually could understood what I was trying to say. |
Then they must suffer from the same intellectual incapacity as you do. I guess they got a good laugh out of the spelling mistakes you made whilst arguing there was no need for a system wide spell check.
quote:
A system-wide spellchecker with non-native widgets is a performance hog, a security risk, and technically unfeasable. |
Whatever... I don't care about the details. A system wide spell checker for me is a utility that any application can access if it is set up to do so, to correct spelling. That's all that matters to real people.
You said that such a function would be a resource hog. In fact, it isn't. I could verify this very easily by looking at activity monitor and from having used the damn thing for years.
In fact many of your arguments seem to be of the form "OS X can't do this". Which is often puzzling, because I'm sitting there doing it and wondering what you are on about. When you get called on this, you retreat into some technical babble and pretend you were talking about something else.
It's pretty funny really.
quote:
What you described wasn't a system-wide spellchecker, it was a spellchecker built into native widgets, which I have no problem with. |
I didn't describe anything in detail. I just said it was a spellcheck that worked system wide. It does. One does not have to be an expert to know that, one just has to look.
And you were slagging it off simply because OS X had it and Windows did not.
quote:
The problem here is -- as usual -- you don't actually understand what you're talking about, you just pretend you do. |
Not really. The problem is that you made a number of claims that could be easily disproved by looking, and then tried to hide this fact by attributing to me something I never said. I don't give a **** about different kinds of spell check - I just want one that works system wide. Mine does, it does not create any of the problems you describe, or not to any noticeable degree (and that's what matters), so your whole argument was a waste of time.
Then you proceeded to try to back out of it by asserting that correct spelling wasn't that much use anyway. Sorry, that's just daft.
Just another example of your frequent BS. Unlike you, I don't deliberately lie or exaggerate things (except for occasional comic effect) and I try not to rely on spurious sources.
I should make a list of some of the BS you've claimed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
|
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
I'm also smart enough and educated enough to know that art is a matter of taste, and I know enough not to bend over to live by other people's taste or rules. |
Which is of course, why you love Coldplay.
quote:
Someone like you will do whatever is necessary to pretend to be an articulate, suave intellectual, and I'm more concerned with living a life I like.
The buffoon here is the person asserting that there are "real books" and "real arts", as if what I enjoy now isn't real. The buffoon here is the idiot who is missing the entire point of life. |
Well, if you want to deny obvious facts then go ahead. It's simply the case that many of the finest things in life, particularly in the arts, cannot be truly appreciated without a lot of work on the part of the audience.
For example, it takes many people a long time to develop an ear for classical music, but most people who do believe it is worth it. Without this effort, you can't really hear it. In our instant-gratification society, such claims are unpopular, but that doesn't mean they aren't true.
Perhaps you might find that you don't like it after all the work, but at least you are in a position to make an informed judgement. Sometimes our little life experiments don't work - that is just life.
Similarly, if you just "live a life you like", you have closed yourself off from the possibility of discovering by hard work that you might like another kind of life perhaps even more than you like the one you have now.
That is why the unexamined life is not worth living. One needs to experiment and develop to be able to choose between several different ways of living. Someone who never does this is simply not in a position to make such a choice.
The bad side is that we're not immortal, so there is no possibility of developing one's tastes in as many areas as one might like, but that's just life.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
Then they must suffer from the same intellectual incapacity as you do. I guess they got a good laugh out of the spelling mistakes you made whilst arguing there was no need for a system wide spell check. |
Who are you to argue about intellectual capacity with a post like this?
1) You still do not understand the details about the things you claim exist (they do not) -- then you say you don't care. System-wide spellcheckers are not feasable and do not exist -- period.
2) I don't see why they got a good laugh out of it...I never said I've never made a spelling mistake. I said the point of my post is clear without the spellchecker, which was actually never addressed by you people with your purported intellectual capacity...
quote:
Whatever... I don't care about the details. A system wide spell checker for me is a utility that any application can access if it is set up to do so, to correct spelling. That's all that matters to real people. |
And my point is, that doesn't exist. It only works for any application using native widgets, which is a far cry from "any application".
The problem here -- once again -- is you're arguing technical arguments without any understanding. You want to argue high-level conceptuals, but it fails because you can't argue that alone unless you understand how it's done.
quote:
You said that such a function would be a resource hog. In fact, it isn't. |
For the third time -- such a function would CERTAINLY be a resource hog. Fortunately, such a function does not exist in OS X. OS X uses widget-based spellchecker, something that could easily be hacked into the Windows MFCs as well.
quote:
I didn't describe anything in detail. I just said it was a spellcheck that worked system wide. It does. |
But it doesn't -- that's my point, and I've tested this at work as well. It doesn't work with Java Swing interfaces, for example...
It only works with native Apple widgets. It is NOT a system-wide spellchecker.
quote:
Not really. The problem is that you made a number of claims that could be easily disproved by looking, and then tried to hide this fact by attributing to me something I never said. |
Another brilliant example of your ineptitude...
What happened was you were talking about something computer-related without an understanding of what you were saying. People with knowledge about computers read more into what you say because the words you use have meaning. "System-wide" means, for example, it'll affect the entire Operating System. Otherwise it's a widget-specific spellchecker, which is what OS X uses.
That was the basis of the entire argument. Now you're backtracking and claiming you don't care about the technicalities, while I'm explaining where my argument came from. You're trying to ignore your incorrect use of terminology and understanding, and reverse it into an attempted slam against my lack of logic or reasoning.
And you're right, it is funny. But only to people with the "intellectual capacity" to understand that the origin of the whole debate was your lack of understanding and incorrect terminology, not my lack of being reasonable.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
Which is of course, why you love Coldplay. |
I think you've mentioned Coldplay to me a couple times now. What's with that?
I own "A Rush of Blood to the Head" which is a decent CD, something I like to listen to when mellow or high.
Is this irrational generalization coming from the .WAV sample I used from Clocks for the audio quality test a long time ago?
My, what a stupid thing of you to do...
quote:
Well, if you want to deny obvious facts then go ahead. It's simply the case that many of the finest things in life, particularly in the arts, cannot be truly appreciated without a lot of work on the part of the audience. |
Art is subjective. Period.
You're a classic example of a snob. You're not an intellectual, you're someone who wants to be one. You've shown yourself to have some of the most bizarre logic and positions on Apolyton, and you've repeatedly shown that you actually have trouble building cohesive, consistent arguments.
You're someone who will thrive in academia in an arts or humanities department, but would be ripped to shreds in any form of a real world.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
25-12-2004 05:57
.
|