Huh? Diesel engines don't last 800 hours before major repairs??
 

gene, you obviously don't know what the word "reference" means. go look it
up, you a***ole lazy clod, and then come back and try to ask your dumb, idiot
dumb squat question again.

gene, you obviously don't know what the word "reference" means. go look it
up,
you lazy clod, and then come back and try to ask your dumb question again.


Have at it, genius, pick one....


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...=defmore&q=def
ine:reference

... but none of them satisfy your usage's requirements.


What is a "specimin" ?

Of course someone that can't spell "specimen" should be expected to
express themselves using the proper word, either. Therefore, your
ignorant and inaccurate postings are understood, though not
necessarily forgiven.

Please try harder....
--



Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Southport, NC.

http://myworkshop.idleplay.net/cavern/ Homepage
http://www.southharbourvillageinn.com/directions.asp Where Southport,NC
is located.
http://www.southharbourvillageinn.linksysnet.com Real Time
Pictures at My Marina
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats Rec.boats
at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide

Huh? Diesel engines don't last 800 hours before major repairs??
 

"steve", you have been over served. go sleep it off.

"steve", ARPANET is long since gone.

Another non-sequitor and stupid statement by you. Usenet did not depend
on arpanet either. You could read and post to usenet newgroups without
an arpanet or what it has become (internet) connection, and still can.

Steve


Steven Shelikoff wrote:
You must use an isp to read a usenet newsgroup.

Well, you have to have *some* sort of Internet connection, at least
intermittently. If you have an Internet connection, you're getting it
from
some service provider. That provider may or may not be a commercial ISP,
but they are an ISP of some sort.

You're making the same mistake he made. No, you don't need an internet
connection of any type to read usenet newsgroups. You can get a
newsfeed without an ISP. The usenet has been around much longer than
the commercial internet as we know it today and for the most part used
UUCP to transfer messages. And you can still use that method without
having any internet access at all.

Of course, when this was all pointed out to Jax and he just huffed and
denied it, as is his usual MO when someone points out a mistake of his,
when the much easier and saner thing to do is to just admit a mistake
and move on. No one's perfect... but Jox thinks he is even though he's
wrong in just about everything he says.

Steve

Huh? Diesel engines don't last 800 hours before major repairs??
 

"steve", you have been over served. go sleep it off yet again.

From: (Steven Shelikoff)
Date: 7/15/2004 7:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

On 15 Jul 2004 13:02:02 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

no, base kisser, the statement was made that across the distance from NYC to
Phildelphia the surface of the Earth is less than a meter or so from planer
and
therefore there is no need to calculate curvature to know the distance to
sail
a boat. "steve" didn't understand that .

As usual, Jox is wrong. The statement was made in the discussion about
3d vectors, where Jox made the general statement:

btw, if vectors are "3 dimensional", just how can they be used at a
point on the Earth's surface (which by definition is planer).

Anyway you look at it, it's a stupid statement. A "point on the Earth's
surface" is a point, not planar. And the Earth's surface itself hasn't
been described as planar for a long time.

"steve" also doesn't understand the meaning of the word "ballistic", which
has
too many sylables. nor does he understand what deduced reckoning is, but
thinks it means watching for lighthouses and nav marks.

According to Jox, a bullet does not travel a ballistic path because it's
guided by the barrel for the initial portion of it's flight. According
to Jox, an ICBM doesn't have a guidance system even though the rest of
the world knows that's not true. According to Jox, the earth's magnetic
field is not an outside reference that the compass reads when you're
doing ded reckoning. He's just full of stupidity.

no does "steve" have any rational clew what cost accounting is (nevermind it
has been a thoroughly understood business principal for more than forty
years),
nor does he have anyremote clew that differences (there are many, many,
many)
between a generator and an alternator.

And Jox still doesn't believe that the voltage produced by an alternator
isn't related to the rpm. He's easily confused because he may be
thinking of ones with a builtin regulator, which not all have.

no does he have an rational clew how a gyroscope works.

Ah, I see Jox still doesn't believe there's such a thing as a north
seeking gyro even after the principles of how it works were explained to
him and he was shown commercial examples of them. What a moron.

Steve

Huh? Diesel engines don't last 800 hours before major repairs??
 

"steve", obviously English is not you first or second or third or fouth
language. go sleep it off for a few days.


(Steven Shelikoff)
wrote:

On 15 Jul 2004 13:02:02 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

"steve" also doesn't understand the meaning of the word "ballistic", which
has
too many sylables. nor does he understand what deduced reckoning is, but
thinks it means watching for lighthouses and nav marks.

According to Jox, a bullet does not travel a ballistic path because it's
guided by the barrel for the initial portion of it's flight. According
to Jox, an ICBM doesn't have a guidance system even though the rest of
the world knows that's not true.

I should have said that according to Jox, a bullet, after it leaves the
barrel, does not travel a ballistic path because it was guided down the
barrel. Just like an ICBM must not travel a ballistic path during the
final portion of it's flight because it was guided by it's guidance
system during it's initial portion of it's flight. He just doesn't
understand that an ICBM does, indeed have a navigation system. Inertial
and GPS are the usual ones.

Steve

Huh? Diesel engines don't last 800 hours before major repairs??
 

"steve", you are speaking in1986 lingo. Come into the 21st Century. ARPANET is
looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooong since
gone.

There is a reason for that.

btw, "steve" to get ARPANET connection you were authorized access by a
university research dept or by the Dept of Defense????????????

Steven Shelikoff wrote:

You can get a
newsfeed without an ISP. The usenet has been around much longer than
the commercial internet as we know it today and for the most part used
UUCP to transfer messages. And you can still use that method without
having any internet access at all.

Oh, I used UUCP for mail and USENET 15+ years ago, but I thought it was
deader'n a doornail by the late 90s. It's certainly technically possible
to move a newsfeed via UUCP, but I have to wonder if you could actually
find anyone who would do it!

Me. I still use UUCP to connect a newsserver on a linux box without
using an internet connection to a newsfeed that has one. The reason for
doing it that way is more political (that I really don't want to get
into) then technical. But there may be other reasons as well, like the
type of access you may have in remote locations, to not use an ISP.

But back to the original point, it is possible to read and post to
usenet newsgroups without using an ISP ... and Jox just bring himself to
admit that's true.

Steve

Huh? Diesel engines don't last 800 hours before major repairs??
 

Steven Shelikoff wrote:

Me. I still use UUCP to connect a newsserver on a linux box without
using an internet connection to a newsfeed that has one. The reason for
doing it that way is more political (that I really don't want to get
into) then technical.

If I had to, I'd guess the political arguments are based on security
arguments. I've done weird crap to work around overactive (and usually
misguided and counterproductive) security policies, and this sounds like
just the sort of thing that would enable you to say "Nope, no IP connection
here."

Shawn.

Huh? Diesel engines don't last 800 hours before major repairs??
 

JAXAshby wrote:

not one of you clowns knows what IP, or what intenet connection, or data
communication means.

LOL. How many IP stacks have *you* written?

I'll readily admit that I've only written one, and it was a half-baked one
at that, but I do know an IP header from a hole in the ground.

Shawn.

Huh? Diesel engines don't last 800 hours before major repairs??
 

JAXAshby wrote:

dude, I sold services for ARPANET back in the days when only universities
and defense contractor's cared.

Then how could you possibly confuse UUCPNET with ARPANET?

Shawn.

Huh? Diesel engines don't last 800 hours before major repairs??
 

that stuff was obsolete back when Bernie Ebbers still thought LDDS was
something to crow about.

Done any work in Baudot recently?

dude, I sold services for ARPANET back in the days when only universities
and defense contractor's cared.

Then how could you possibly confuse UUCPNET with ARPANET?

Shawn.

Huh? Diesel engines don't last 800 hours before major repairs??
 

On 16 Jul 2004 04:02:05 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

guys, "IP" ------------- means --------------Internet Protocol and has not a
thing with how the beast was connected.

Maybe you're finally getting it. USENET over UUCP is NOT Internet
Protocol.

Steve