Autocoding project proposal.

[Timothy Rue]

On 26-Jan-02 18:14:04 phil hunt <philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Jan 2002 17:57:19 GMT, Timothy Rue <threeseas at earthlink.net>
>wrote:
>>On 26-Jan-02 07:43:17 phil hunt <philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>>Here's my prediction: either Tim will not answer this, or if he does answer
>>>it, it will not be with an explanation of how VIC does things, but with two
>>>things: (i) a not-particularly-illustrative metaphor, and (ii) an
>>>implication that programmers are too stupid/elitist/brainwashed to
>>>understand him.
>>
>>[...]
>>The trick in the question is like saying I have this idea for a router on
>>an x y table that will be able to cut any shape I tell the system to cut.
>>
>>And then having someone ask me how it would cut a circle. And before
>>anything but the example of a router and an x y table and a computer are
>>presented.
>>
>>To explain how it cuts a circle could be explained by saying you have a
>>hole in the middle of the table and you use the markings on the table to
>>center up the material on the table. You then have an x and y bar tha you
>>fold down on the table so to mark where you are to drill the hole in the
>>material so to place a piviot point for an adjustable router base. From
>>here you place the base piviot point thru the hole and into the x y table.
>>Adjust the distance away from the piviot point the router tip is and turn
>>the router on and lower it into the material and push it around the piviot
>>point (counter clockwise for the typical router). The computer is a
>>calculater you use to determine the distance away from the router bit that
>>the center of the piviot point is, inorder to get the distance around the
>>circle that you want. And this process will work.

>I guess that accounts for (i)...

>>
>>Phil is to stupid to know all this. Right Phil?

>...and this accounts for (ii).

>Looks like I got it right.

No, you didn't get anything right except for understanding the inherent
error of the initial question of expecting a simple answer. Where upon
knowing this, you took what you knew would be the correct response to the
question and tried to distort it to make it appear wrong by attaching a
negative connotation to a yet to be correctly answered question.

My, having addressed both the original question, your effort to distort a
correct answer and then presenting you with the correct task to do in
order to verify the correct answer, you responsed by taking out of context
the answer I gave, ignoring what doesn't fit you intended response to make
yourself out to be right.

All you have done is prove that it is your intent to be deceptive, and
arrogant. And that really does make you ignorant. Who all are you fooling?


---
*3 S.E.A.S - Virtual Interaction Configuration (VIC) - VISION OF VISIONS!*
   *~ ~ ~      Advancing How we Perceive and Use the Tool of Computers!*
Timothy Rue      What's *DONE* in all we do?  *AI PK OI IP OP SF IQ ID KE*
Email @ mailto:timrue at mindspring.com      >INPUT->(Processing)->OUTPUT>v
Web @ http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/  ^<--------<----9----<--------<