Re: JSH: Why you're fun
- From: Michael Press <rubrum@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 23:07:18 -0700
In article <Xns9BDA59B25C8B4tim111one@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Tim Peters <tim.one@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[JSH]
The question on the table now is, how will you and yours handle this
latest perturbation to your system.
[rossum]
The question that interests me James is how _you_ will handle the
latest perturbation to your system. You had "proof" of a factoring
algorithm that you have now withdrawn - posts disappearing from your
blog and your admission of it taking a "huge battering".
Your "proof" was obviously not a proof, as many here had indicated.
Are you going to actually learn anything from this latest repetition
of your usual cycle James? Even you must be getting a little tired of
announcing the imminent arrival of The Hammer, only to have to say
"whoops, I made a mistake" a few weeks later.
He already answered: while it's been a while since he last passed through
this stage, his post here is very much part of his usual cycle. That is,
after an extreme bout of repeating false claims with hysterical intensity,
he makes a faux-calm post implying he's actually a superhuman being
conducting sociohistorical experiments, in which his Usenet correspondents
are merely his unwitting pawns. IOW, he's handling this "perturbation" the
same way he /always/ does: insanely.
It's tempting to say it would be funny if it weren't so pathetic -- but, in
truth, it's funny /because/ it's so pathetic ;-)
It is not funny until a balanced person cracks wise.
Until then it is tragic.
--
Michael Press
.
- Prev by Date: Re: JSH:Why you're more interesting
- Next by Date: Re: Need detailed proof for construction of square root of 2
- Previous by thread: slant asymptotes involving radicals
- Next by thread: MathForum
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
